James C. Hogan v. Karen Brazier, Deputy State Public Defender

12 F.3d 1106 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. James C. HOGAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Karen BRAZIER, Deputy State Public Defender, Defendant-Appellee. No. 93-16038. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Nov. 17, 1993. * Decided Dec. 6, 1993. Before: SCHROEDER, D.W. NELSON and THOMPSON, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 James C. Hogan, a former Nevada state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's dismissal for failure to state a claim of his 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 action against Karen Braizer, a deputy state public defender. He contends that the district court erred in dismissing his claims that Braizer inadequately represented him and conspired with the district attorney in a state criminal proceeding. We review de novo, Kruso v. Int'l Telephone & Telegraph Corp., 872 F.2d 1416 , 1421 (9th Cir.1989), cert. denied, 496 U.S. 937 (1990), and we affirm. 3 A public defender "performing a lawyer's traditional functions as counsel to a…