Richmond

Richmond v. Cockrum

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaMay 14, 20201:20-cv-00389California3,778 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 EUREKA DIVISION 7 8 WAYNE-STEVEN RICHMOND, Case No. 20-cv-00389-RMI

9 Plaintiff,

ORDER ON MOTION TO DISMISS

10 v. Re: Dkt. No. 7 11 KALEB V. COCKRUM, 12 Defendant.

13 14 Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, brings this action against the Honorable Kaleb V. Cockrum, a 15 judge for the Humboldt County Superior Court, in his individual capacity for certain rulings made 16 during Plaintiff’s state court criminal trial. See Compl. (dkt. 1). Plaintiff brings his claims pursuant 17 to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and seeks money damages and an order that the state-court records be cleared. 18 Id. Defendant now moves to dismiss Plaintiff’s claims on the grounds that this court lacks subject 19 matter jurisdiction pursuant to the Rooker-Feldman doctrine and the Eleventh Amendment and for 20 failure to state a claim due to judicial immunity and the Heck doctrine. See Def.’s Mot. (dkt. 7). 21 Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-1(b), the court finds this matter suitable for decision without oral 22 …

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.