Lary Gene Shelton, Plaintiff-appellant, v. John Suthers, 4th District, District Attorney, and Robynhamilton, Deputy District Attorney, Defendants-appellees, 952 F.2d 409 (10th Cir. 1992)

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this panel. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(e); 10th Cir.R. 34.1.9. The cause is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.

Lary Shelton appeals the dismissal of his § 1983 action against two Colorado Deputy District Attorneys. The district court, upon the recommendation of a magistrate judge, found the complaint asserted claims against the defendants for actions taken in their official capacity and dismissed the action on grounds of prosecutorial immunity. On appeal, Mr. Shelton asserts (to the extent we are able to understand his brief) that the district court misconstrued his complaint and that "this case does not have connection with the prosecutorial function of the district attorney." He seems to argue that the object of his suit is some agency of the State of Colorado.

We have examined the complaint filed in the district court, and we see no way to construe it other than as a suit against the defendants for actions they took in their official capacity. As a consequence, the district court correctly concluded they were immune and dismissed the case. Arnold v. McClain, 926 F.2d 963, 967 (10th Cir. 1991). Mr. Shelton's effort to avoid this result by asserting his grievance was against an agency of the state is in vain because of the Eleventh Amendment prohibition of such actions. The mandate shall issue forthwith.

AFFIRMED.