USCA1 Opinion
[NOT FOR PUBLICATION]
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
____________________
No. 97-1394
MAURICE D. YOUNG,
Plaintiff, Appellant,
v.
JOHN HANSEN, ET AL.,
Defendants, Appellees.
____________________
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MAINE
[Hon. Morton A. Brody, U.S. District Judge]
___________________
____________________
Before
Selya, Boudin and Lynch,
Circuit Judges.
______________
____________________
Maurice D. Young on brief pro se.
________________
William R. Fisher, Ivy L. Frignoca and Monaghan, Leahy, Hochadel
__________________ ________________ _________________________
& Libby on brief for appellees.
_______
____________________
October 24, 1997
____________________
Per Curiam. Pro se plaintiff Maurice Young appeals a
___________ ___ __
district court judgment that dismissed as frivolous his
second 42 U.S.C. 1983 complaint for damages allegedly
caused by his wrongful arrest and prosecution. See 28 U.S.C.
___
1915(e)(2)(B)(i). This court previously affirmed the
district court's dismissal of Young's first 1983 complaint
as frivolous. See Young v. Knox County Deputy, et al., slip
___ _____ ___________________________
op. no. 95-1064 (1st Cir. Oct. 17, 1995). Having thoroughly
reviewed the record and the parties' briefs on appeal, we
agree that this case essentially duplicates Young's first
action. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is
summarily affirmed. See, e.g., McWilliams v. Colorado, 121
________ ___ ____ __________ ________
F.2d 573, 574 (10th Cir. 1997); Hudson v. Hedge, 27 F.3d 274,
______ _____
276 (7th Cir. 1994); Cooper v. Delo, 997 F.2d 376, 377 (8th
______ ____
Cir. 1993); Local Rule 27.1.
-2-
