Unpublished Disposition, 887 F.2d 1089 (9th Cir. 1989)Annotate this Case
James M. MOCK, Plaintiff-Appellant,v.CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL; James Smith; California StateDepartment of Public Works, Defendants-Appellees.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted July 25, 1989.* Decided Oct. 2, 1989.
Before JAMES R. BROWNING, KOZINSKI and RYMER, Circuit Judges.
The crux of appellant's complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1983 is that he was issued a traffic ticket, and convicted, for driving his truck in the left lane at the junction of two highways, despite the fact that it was impossible to reach the right lane safely from appellant's point of entry on the left side of the highway except by lane changes at excessive speeds and without proper clearance. The district court dismissed for want of subject matter jurisdiction. We affirm.
Appellant's claim of ex post facto violation is unintelligible and his due process claim is "wholly insubstantial and frivolous." Keniston v. Roberts, 717 F.2d 1295, 1298 (9th Cir. 1983) (quotation omitted). Rejection of even a plausible defense in the course of the routine issuance and enforcement of a traffic ticket does not violate due process.