F I L E D
United States Court of Appeals
Tenth Circuit
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
JUL 13 1999
TENTH CIRCUIT
PATRICK FISHER
Clerk
FERMAN JONES,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v. No. 99-6040
KAREN EVANS, (D.C. No. CIV-98-469-M)
(W.D. Okla.)
Defendant-Appellee.
ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
Before ANDERSON, KELLY and BRISCOE, Circuit Judges.
After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined
unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of
this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is
therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.
Plaintiff Ferman Jones, appearing pro se and in forma pauperis , appeals
from the district court’s dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim against his
This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the
*
doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court
generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order
and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.
former state public defender. We exercise jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 1291 and affirm.
Jones complains that defendant Karen Evans, in her former role as an
Oklahoma County public defender, “manufactured claims, forcing [him to be] sent
to the Vinita State Hospital,” and thereby denied him access to the courts. The
district court dismissed Jones’ complaint for failure to state a claim upon which
relief may be granted because Evans is not a state actor. Potential liability under
§ 1983 attaches only to persons who are acting under color of state law. The
Supreme Court expressly held in Polk County v. Dodson , 454 U.S. 312, 325
(1981), that “a public defender does not act under color of state law when
performing a lawyer’s traditional functions as counsel to a defendant in a criminal
proceeding.” Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. The
mandate shall issue forthwith.
Entered for the Court
Mary Beck Briscoe
Circuit Judge
-2-