Lawny Lamar Browning v. Cecil Andrus, the Idaho State Legislature

42 F.3d 1398 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Lawny Lamar BROWNING, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Cecil ANDRUS, the Idaho State Legislature, Defendants-Appellees. No. 94-35352. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Nov. 4, 1994. * Decided Dec. 6, 1994. 1 Before: BEEZER and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges, and ORRICK ** , District Judge. 2 MEMORANDUM *** 3 Pro se plaintiff, Lawny Browning, filed this action under 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 , alleging that his constitutional rights have been violated because Idaho Code Sec. 20-223(b) violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution. The district court dismissed the complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1915 (d) finding no arguable basis in law or fact for Browning's claim that his constitutional rights have been violated and that Browning did not assert a case or controversy. The district court had jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1343 (3) and 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 . We have jurisdiction and…