Edmond A. Gray v. Allen C. Nielson

95 F.3d 1157 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Edmond A. GRAY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Allen C. NIELSON, Defendant-Appellee. No. 95-36036. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Aug. 12, 1996. * Decided Aug. 19, 1996. Before: BROWNING, SCHROEDER, and RYMER, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Edmond Gray, a Washington state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint alleging that Allen C. Nielson, a state prosecutor, violated Gray's civil rights during his criminal prosecution. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm. 3 We review for abuse of discretion a district court's dismissal of an in forma pauperis complaint as frivolous. See Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 33 (1992); Trimble v. City of Santa Rosa, 49 F.3d 583, 584 (9th Cir.1995). 1 4 "[A] final judgment on the merits of an action precludes the parties or their privies from relitigating issues that were…