Sadoski
Sadoski v. Mosley
Opinion
Lead Opinion
Gould, J.
Plaintiff-Appellant, Jeanette Faye Sado-ski, appeals the district court’s order dismissing her complaint for damages and injunctive relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 . Sadoski alleges that Defendant-Appellee, Judge Donald M. Mosley, after sentencing Sadoski to a twelve-month term of incarceration for attempted theft, unlawfully re-sentenced her to a term of incarceration between twelve and thirty-two months, subjecting Sadoski to double jeopardy in violation of her federal and state constitutional rights. Sadoski further alleges that Defendants-Appellees Stewart Bell, David Roger, Jackie Crawford, and Clark County violated Sadoski’s protection against double jeopardy by seeking or executing the more severe sentence.
The district court concluded that Judge Mosley was entitled to absolute immunity for his actions in Sadoski’s case and that Judge Mosley’s immunity protected the other defendants as well. The district court also concluded that Sadoski did not have standing to assert a class claim for injunctive relief. The district court dismissed Sadoski’s suit pursuant to Fed. R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.
*1078 I
At the time of the…
Concurring Opinion
Gould, J.
concurring:
At trial and on this appeal, Sadoski stated that her claims against defendants Bell, Roger, and Crawford would fail if we concluded that Judge Mosley was entitled to absolute immunity. The district court accepted Sadoski’s concession and did .not separately address the standards for immunity of the prosecutors and of the corrections official. The opinion of our court on this appeal also accepts the appellant’s concession and does not address the immunity .standards for the other defendants. To avoid the risk that a reader might think incorrectly that the immunity of the prosecutor and the corrections official turns on the resolution of the issue, of. judicial iim munity, I write separately to express the view that the prosecutor and the eorrec-tiong official would here have immunity even if Judge Mosley had acted in the clear absence of all jurisdiction.
Generally, a prosecutor is immune from civil liability for actions taken during the course of the prosecutor’s duties. See Ashelman v. Pope, 793 F.2d 1072, 1076 (9th Cir.1986) (“Where a prosecutor acts as an advocate in initiating.a prosecution and in presenting the state’s case, absolute immunity applies.” (internal…
Opinion
FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JEANETTE FAYE SADOSKI, on behalf of herself and as a representative of all other persons who have been illegally re-sentenced by Defendant Nevada District Judge Donald M. Mosley in violation of rights under the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution not to be twice placed in jeopardy for the same criminal offense, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. DONALD M. MOSLEY, as an No. 04-15447 individual and also in his official capacity as District Court Judge of D.C. No.
CV-03-01292-RCJ
the Eighth Judicial District of the State of Nevada; STEWART L. BELL, OPINION as an individual and also in his official capacity as the District Attorney of Clark County, Nevada; DAVID ROGER, as an individual and also in his official capacity as the District Attorney of Clark County, Nevada; JACKIE CRAWFORD, as an individual and also in her official capacity as the Director of the Nevada Department of Corrections; CLARK
COUNTY, NEVADA,
Defendants-Appellees.
969 970 SADOSKI v. MOSLEY Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Nevada…