632 N.E.2d 525 | Ohio Ct. App. | 1993
This cause came on to be heard upon the accelerated calendar pursuant to App.R. 11.1 and Loc.R. 25, the records from the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas, the briefs and the oral arguments of counsel.
On June 14, 1991, pro se plaintiff-appellant Donald L. Richard, Sr. (hereinafter "appellant") brought this action for malicious prosecution against Assistant Cuyahoga County Prosecutor Clark Rice. Appellant alleged that Rice knowingly allowed two witnesses to perjure themselves in connection with the criminal prosecution brought against him for the alleged felonious assault of Donnie Garner.1 The trial court granted Rice's motion to dismiss the complaint on the basis of absolute prosecutorial immunity. For reasons which follow, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
In Imbler v. Pachtman (1974),
While it is not always clear whether a given action falls within the prosecutor's advocacy function, there is little doubt that the use of alleged perjured testimony does. In Imbler, a majority expressly held that the alleged use of perjured testimony could not defeat a claim of absolute immunity. Imbler,supra, at 431,
Based on the foregoing, we conclude that the motion to dismiss filed by Rice was properly granted by the trial court.
Appellant's first assignment of error is overruled.
In light of our determination that the trial court was correct in dismissing appellant's complaint on the basis of absolute prosecutorial immunity, appellant's second assignment of error is moot.
The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
Judgment affirmed.
PATTON, P.J., NUGENT and ANN MCMANAMON, JJ., concur.
ANN MCMANAMON, J., retired, of the Eighth Appellate District, sitting by assignment.