State of Oregon, Acting by and Through the Director Ofveterans Affairs, Plaintiff-appellee, v. Thomas J. Martin, Defendant-appellant, 99 F.3d 1146 (9th Cir. 1996)
Annotate this CaseBefore: BEEZER, KOZINSKI and KLEINFELD, Circuit Judges.
MEMORANDUM**
Thomas J. Martin appeals pro se the district court's dismissal of his complaint as frivolous. We affirm.
Federal district courts lack subject matter jurisdiction to review the final determinations of a state court in judicial proceedings. See Branson v. Nott, 62 F.3d 287, 291 (9th Cir. 1995). "This is true even when the challenge to a state court decision involves federal constitutional issues." Id.
In his complaint, Martin challenges an adverse decision of the Oregon Court of Appeals and the Oregon Supreme Court's order denying his petition for review of that decision. The district court properly concluded that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction to review Martin's impermissible collateral attack on prior state court decisions. See id. at 291-92. We therefore affirm the district court's dismissal of Martin's complaint.
AFFIRMED.1
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 9th Cir.R. 34-4
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir.R. 36-3
Martin's request for oral argument is denied
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
