Hyde v. State of Massachuset ( 2021 )

Not for Publication in West's Federal Reporter
United States Court of Appeals
For the First Circuit
No. 06-1777
MICHAEL J. HYDE,
Plaintiff, Appellant,
v.
STATE OF MASSACHUSETTS, ET AL.,
Defendants, Appellees.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
[Hon. Rya W. Zobel, U.S. District Judge]
Before
Torruella, Lynch and Lipez,
Circuit Judges.
Michael J. Hyde on brief pro se.
Annette C. Benedetto, Assistant Attorney General and Thomas
F. Reilly, Attorney General, on brief for appellees State of
Massachusetts, et al.
Joseph G. Donnellan on brief for appellees, Paul Baker and
Rachel Ruthier.
Robert W. Harnais on brief for appellee Norfolk County House
of Correction.
March 23, 2007
Per Curiam. Pro se appellant Michael Hyde appeals from
the dismissal of his civil rights complaint based on events that
occurred in connection with his arrest and subsequent guilty plea
to violating the state wiretapping law. After careful review of
his appellate contentions and the district court record, we affirm,
substantially for the reasons given by the district court in its
Memorandum of Decision dated March 23, 2006.
For various reasons, Hyde's appellate contentions are
unpersuasive. First, Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994),
applies and bars certain claims, while others are barred by
absolute judicial immunity. Moreover, Hyde has not shown any legal
basis for some of his claims, and he has waived others by failing
to develop his argument adequately. See Negeya v. Gonzales, 417
F.3d 78, 85 (1st Cir. 2005) (finding a waiver based on undeveloped
appellate arguments). Finally, he relies in several instances on
Supreme Court cases that are inapposite.
Affirmed. See 1st Cir. Loc. R. 27.0(c).
-2-