Arthur Gallegos v. State of Arizona

MEMORANDUM

Arthur Charles Gallegos appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging a Second Amendment claim arising out of the the Arizona Court of Appeals’s denial of his request as a convicted felon to restore his right to bear arms. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo the dismissal of an action under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, Noel v. Hall, 341 F.3d 1148, 1154 (9th Cir.2003), and for an abuse of discretion the denial of a motion for leave to amend, Chodos v. West Publ'g Co., 292 F.3d 992, 1003 (9th Cir.2002). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Gallegos’s action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine because it amounted to a forbidden “de facto appeal” of a state court judgment and raised a constitutional claim that was “inextricably intertwined” with that state court judgment. See Noel, 341 F.3d at 1163-65 ; see also Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Saudi Basic Indus. Corp., 544 U.S. 280, 284 , 125 S.Ct. 1517 , 161 L.Ed.2d 454 (2005) (Rooker-Feldman bars “state-court losers complaining of injuries caused by state-court judgments rendered before the district…