Hodnett v. Kowalczuk et al

Filing 6

MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge Norman K. Moon on 07/31/2014. (kab)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
ROANOKE DIVISION
SHANE DERAY HODNETT,
Plaintiff,
v.
CHRISTOPHER K. KOWALCZUK, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Civil Action No. 7:14cv00394
MEMORANDUM OPINION
By: Norman K. Moon
United States District Judge

Plaintiff Shane Deray Hodnett, a Virginia inmate proceeding pro se, brings this civil
rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against his two former criminal defense attorneys, one
retained and one appointed, complaining about the way each of them handled Hodnett’s criminal
case. I find that the named defendants are not proper defendants to a § 1983 action and,
therefore, will dismiss Hodnett’s complaint without prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii).
To state a cause of action under § 1983, a plaintiff must allege facts indicating that he has
been deprived of rights guaranteed by the Constitution or laws of the United States and that this
deprivation resulted from conduct committed by a person acting under color of state law. West v.
Atkins, 487 U.S. 42 (1988).

An attorney, whether retained or court-appointed, who defends a

person against a criminal charge does not act under color of state law in their representation of
that person. See, e.g., Deas v. Potts, 547 F.2d 800 (4th Cir. 1976) (private attorney); Hall v.
Quillen, 631 F.2d 1154, 1155-56 & nn.2-3 (4th Cir. 1980) (court-appointed attorney). Therefore,
I will dismiss this action for failing to state a claim.
ENTER: This 31st day of July, 2014.