Steven Crain v. Clark County Public Defender

MEMORANDUM

Steven Crain appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing with prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo an order dismissing a claim, Price v. State of Hawaii, 939 F.2d 702, 706 (9th Cir.1991), and we affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Crain’s claims against the Nevada Commission on Judicial Discipline because under the Eleventh Amendment the Commission is immune from suit. See Nev. Rev.Stat. 41.031(3) (“The State of Nevada does not waive its immunity from suit conferred by Amendment XI of the Constitution of the United States.”); Taylor v. List, 880 F.2d 1040, 1045 (9th Cir.1989) (stating that Eleventh Amendment immunity applies to state agencies).

The district court properly dismissed Crain’s claims against psychotherapists Williams and Pacult because Crain did not state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 or 18 U.S.C. § 241 . See Price, 939 F.2d at 707-08 (stating that “private parties are not generally acting under color of state law” for purposes of § 1983); Peabody v. United States, 394 F.2d 175, 177 (9th Cir.1968) (stating that § 241 does not provide a private right of…