[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT FILED
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
________________________ ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
May 10, 2005
No. 05-10139 THOMAS K. KAHN
Non-Argument Calendar CLERK
________________________
D. C. Docket No. 04-00063-CV-6
WILLIAM E. HATCHER,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
F. GATES PEED, Judge,
Superior Court of Effingham County, GA,
Defendant-Appellee.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Georgia
_________________________
(May 10, 2005)
Before DUBINA, HULL and WILSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Plaintiff/Appellant William E. Hatcher filed an action against the Honorable
F. Gates Peed (“Judge Peed”) of the Superior Court of Effingham County,
Georgia, under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Specifically, Hatcher alleges that Judge Peed
violated Hatcher’s due process rights by ordering his arrest without cause and
granting his adult daughter visitation rights to his minor children. The district
court granted Judge Peed’s motion to dismiss on the ground of judicial immunity.
Hatcher then perfected this appeal.
This court reviews de novo a district court’s dismissal of a complaint.
Simmons v. Sonyika,
394 F.3d 1335 (11th Cir. 2004).
After reviewing the record and reading the parties’ briefs, we conclude that
the district court correctly dismissed the action against Judge Peed based on the
doctrine of judicial immunity. See Mireles v. Waco,
502 U.S. 9,
112 S. Ct. 286,
116 L. Ed. 2d 9 (1991); Dykes v. Hosemann,
776 F.2d 942 (11th Cir. 1985).
Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment of dismissal.
AFFIRMED.
2
