Reid v. State of New Hampshi

[NOT FOR PUBLICATION--NOT TO BE CITED AS PRECEDENT]
United States Court of Appeals
For the First Circuit
No. 01-1557
GORDON C. REID,
Plaintiff, Appellant,
v.
GARY SIMMONS, ET AL.,
Defendants, Appellees.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
[Hon. Steven J. McAuliffe, U.S. District Judge]
Before
Boudin, Chief Judge,
Torruella and Lipez, Circuit Judges.
Gordon C. Reid on brief pro se.
Robert G. Whaland and McDonough & O'Shaughnessy, P.A. on brief
for appellee.
September 25, 2002
Per Curiam. Pro se appellant Gordon Reid appeals a
district court decision which granted judgment as a matter of
to appellee Simmons on Reid’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim for the
failure to disclose exculpatory impeachment evidence. We have
thoroughly reviewed the record and the parties' briefs on
appeal. While we are not in complete agreement with the
district court's thoughtful opinion, we agree that the evidence
was insufficient as a matter of law to prove that Simmons
failed to disclose the evidence in issue either deliberately or
with reckless indifference to Reid’s constitutional rights.1
Accordingly, appellant's motion to correct the record is
denied, and the judgment of the district court is affirmed.
See Local Rule 27(c).
1
We reject Reid's contention that Simmons is procedurally
barred from obtaining judgment as a matter of law (JMOL) because he
failed to renew his motion for JMOL after resting. See, e.g.,
Douglas County Bank v. United Financial, Inc., 207 F.3d 473, 477
(8th Cir. 2000), Alcatel USA, Inc. v. DGI Technologies, 166 F.3d
772, 780-81 (5th Cir. 1999), Pittsburgh-Des Moines Steel Co. v.
Brookhaven Manor Water Co., 532 F.2d 572, 575-77 (7th Cir. 1976).
-2-