USCA1 Opinion
August 20, 1993
[NOT FOR PUBLICATION]
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
____________________
No. 93-1140
NAZZARO SCARPA,
Plaintiff, Appellant,
v.
JOSEPH DESMOND,
Defendant, Appellee.
____________________
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
[Hon. William G. Young, U.S. District Judge]
___________________
____________________
Before
Breyer, Chief Judge,
___________
Selya and Stahl, Circuit Judges.
______________
____________________
Nazzaro Scarpa on brief pro se.
______________
A. John Pappalardo, United States Attorney, and Suzanne E.
____________________ ___________
Durrell, Assistant United States Attorney, on Memorandum in Support of
_______
Appellee's Motion for Summary Disposition, for appellee.
____________________
____________________
Per Curiam. Upon review of the parties' briefs and the
__________
record on appeal, we find no error in the district court's
dismissal of plaintiff's complaint based on the reasons set
forth in the defendant's memorandum. We add only that, in
any event, plaintiff's allegation that the defendant
committed perjury, even accepted as true for purposes of the
motion to dismiss, does not support a civil rights claim for
damages. See Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 325 (1983) (holding
___ _______ _____
that a police officer witness is entitled to absolute
immunity against a 1983 claim; alleged perjury at trial);
Kyricopoulos v. Town of Orleans, 967 F.2d 14, 16 (1st Cir.
____________ ________________
1992) (same; alleged perjury before grand jury and at trial);
see also Butz v. Economou, 438 U.S. 478, 504 (1978) (stating
___ ____ ____ ________
that, for purposes of immunity law, there is no distinction
between suits brought against state officials under 1983
and suits brought directly under the Constitution against
federal officials).
Affirmed.
________