Easton
Easton v. Fallman
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM *
Plaintiff Thomas Dewey Easton appeals the district court’s adverse judgment in his action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 . Because the parties are familiar with the facts, we recount them only as necessary. We affirm.
*943 Easton alleged that officials from the Del Norte County District Attorney’s Office (“County Defendants”) withheld exculpatory evidence in violation of Brady v. Maryland, 378 U.S. 83 , 83 S.Ct. 1194 , 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963). The district court granted County Defendants’ motion to dismiss on the grounds that they were entitled to absolute immunity. Because Easton has failed to raise an argument on appeal challenging the County Defendants’ absolute immunity, we affirm the dismissal of the County Defendants. See Officers for Justice v. Civil Service Comm’n, 979 F.2d 721 , 726 (9th Cir.1992).
Easton also alleged that prison officials currently or formerly employed by the California Department of Corrections (“State Defendants”) violated his First Amendment rights by banning him from visiting prison inmates or sending them mail. The district court granted State Defendants’ motion for summary judgment on the ground of qualified immunity.