[T][U] Wilkins v. Cowell

MEMORANDUM* Daniel Drewlen Wilkins, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights action against Michael A. Cowell and James Kimmel. Wilkins alleged that Cowell, a superior court Judge, violated Wilkins's due process rights and right to counsel by denying Wilkins a continuance at his criminal trial. Wilkins also alleged that Kimmel, a deputy district attorney, violated Wilkins's rights by prosecuting Wilkins despite Cowell's failure to grant Wilkins a fair trial.1 We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm. A. Cowell Wilkins contends that the district court erred by dismissing his claim for damages against Cowell pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) because Cowell is not entitled to absolute judicial immunity. This contention lacks merit.