USCA1 Opinion

October 17, 1995

[NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT

____________________

No. 95-1064

MAURICE D. YOUNG,

Plaintiff, Appellant,

v.

KNOX COUNTY DEPUTY, ET AL.,

Defendants, Appellees.

____________________

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF MAINE

[Hon. Gene Carter, Chief U.S. District Judge]

_________________________

____________________

Before

Cyr, Boudin and Lynch,

Circuit Judges.
______________

____________________

Maurice D. Young on brief pro se.

________________
William R. Fisher and Monaghan, Leahy, Hochadel & Libby on
_________________
__________________________________
for appellees.

br

____________________

____________________

Per Curiam.
__________

district court

frivolous

reviewed the

We are persuaded

was correct.

state

judgment that

dismissed his

within the meaning of 28 U.S.C.

thoroughly

appeal.

Pro se plaintiff Maurice Young appeals

___ __

The

record and

1915(d).

the parties'

We have

briefs on

that the district court's judgment

plaintiff's amended complaint purported to

claims under

42 U.S.C.

1983 for

Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments' due

the

complaint as

Fourth Amendment

right

to be

violations

of the

process requirement and

free from

"unreasonable

seizures."

These claims were based on the alleged actions of

defendant Hansen, the

and allegedly

deputy sheriff who

arrested plaintiff

committed perjury while testifying against the

plaintiff at his state criminal trial.

Insofar as plaintiff seeks

to recover for Hansen's

alleged perjury, his claim is barred by Briscoe v. LaHue, 460

_______
_____

U.S.

325 (1983)(holding all

from

civil

suit

under

perjured testimony).

witnesses are absolutely immune

1983,

Insofar

for violation of plaintiff's

including

those

who

give

as the complaint seeks damages

Fifth and Fourteenth

Amendment

rights to procedural due process, the claim is barred because

the

plaintiff

procedural

due

has

adequate

process claim

remedies at

may

not

state

law.

be redressed

"[A]

under

section 1983 where an adequate state remedy exists."

New Hampshire,
_____________

56 F.3d 332, 341

(1st Cir. 1995).

Reid v.
____

As Maine

recognizes the common law torts of false arrest and malicious

-2-

prosecution, see, e.g.,

___ ____

Nadeau v. State,
______
_____

395 A.2d 107,

116

(Me.

1978);

Qualey v.
______

1988), plaintiff

may not

540 A.2d

has adequate post-deprivation

recover for the alleged violation

process under 42 U.S.C.

the extent

due

Town of Wilton,
_______________

1983.

remedies and

of procedural due

See Reid, 56 F.3d at 341.

___ ____

that plaintiff alleges violations

To

of substantive

process, Albright v. Oliver, 114 S. Ct. 807 (1994), bars

________
______

his claim.

claim

479 (Me.

Plaintiff's

for the

prohibition

alleged violation

against unreasonable

matter of law

of the

Fourth Amendment's

seizures

for different reasons.

The

is barred

as

plaintiff alleged

that defendant Hansen arrested him without probable cause for

operating under

license had been

the influence (OUI) and

revoked (OAR).

operating after his

Plaintiff

has submitted an

arrest report which indicates that Hansen arrested him on the

foregoing

plates.

his

charges

and

for

illegal

attachment of

license

The plaintiff claims that after a jury deadlocked at

criminal trial

on the

reduced these charges to

OUI and

OAR charges,

the state

illegally attaching license

plates

and allowing his motor vehicle to be driven (presumably, with

the

illegal plates).

probable

cause

"Probable

be

was

The plaintiff does

lacking

for

these

latter

charges.

cause need only exist as to any offense that could

charged under the circumstances." Barna

_____

Amboy,
_____

not contend that

42 F.3d 809, 819 (3rd Cir.

-3-

1994).

v. City of Perth
_____________

See also Barry v.

___ ____ _____

Fowler, 902
______

F.2d 770, 773

City
of Philadelphia,
_______________________

1988)(similar).

probable

attachment

cause

of

Where

was

860

F.2d

plaintiff

lacking

license

unreasonable seizure,

n. 5 (9th Cir.

for

plates,

1990); Edwards v.
_______

568,

does

his

576

not

arrest

he cannot

even if probable cause

(3rd

Cir.

contend

that

for

recover

illegal

for

an

was lacking on

the OUI and OAR charges.

claims lack

dismissed as

an

Accordingly, as plaintiff's federal

arguable basis

frivolous.

See
___

in law,

they were

properly

Neitzke v. Williams,
_______
________

490 U.S.

319, 325 (1989).

There was

no separate discussion of

claims by the

district court.

allege claims

that would

state law claims were

jurisdiction.

715,

As plaintiff

support federal

dismissed without

However,

prejudice.

court is

to

jurisdiction, his

lack of

Gibbs, 383
_____

U.S.

these claims should have been

See Figueroa Ruiz v. Alegria,

___ ______________
_______

896 F.2d 645, 650 (1st Cir. 1990).

of the district

has failed

also subject to dismissal for

See United Mine Workers v.

___ ____________________

726-27 (1966).

the state law

Accordingly, the judgment

affirmed insofar
________

as it

dismisses

plaintiff's federal

claims (i.e., counts 1-4

amended complaint) as frivolous.

plaintiff's

amended

claims

state

law

claims

complaint) and remand

______

be dismissed

We vacate the dismissal of

______

(i.e., counts

-4-

5-13

with instructions

without prejudice

jurisdiction.

of plaintiff's

for lack

of

the

that these

of federal

It is so ordered.
________________

-5-