
USCA1 Opinion

	




          August 20, 1993                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT                                 ____________________        No. 93-1140                                    NAZZARO SCARPA,                                Plaintiff, Appellant,                                          v.                                   JOSEPH DESMOND,                                 Defendant, Appellee.                                 ____________________                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT                          FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS                     [Hon. William G. Young, U.S. District Judge]                                             ___________________                                 ____________________                                        Before                                 Breyer, Chief Judge,                                         ___________                           Selya and Stahl, Circuit Judges.                                            ______________                                 ____________________            Nazzaro Scarpa on brief pro se.            ______________            A.  John  Pappalardo,  United  States  Attorney,  and  Suzanne  E.            ____________________                                   ___________        Durrell, Assistant United States Attorney, on Memorandum in Support of        _______        Appellee's Motion for Summary Disposition, for appellee.                                 ____________________                                 ____________________                 Per Curiam.   Upon review of the parties' briefs and the                 __________            record on appeal,  we find no error  in the district  court's            dismissal of  plaintiff's complaint based on  the reasons set            forth in the  defendant's memorandum.  We  add only that,  in            any   event,  plaintiff's   allegation  that   the  defendant            committed  perjury, even accepted as true for purposes of the            motion to dismiss,  does not support a civil rights claim for            damages.  See  Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 325 (1983) (holding                      ___  _______    _____            that  a  police  officer  witness  is  entitled  to  absolute            immunity  against a   1983 claim;  alleged perjury at trial);            Kyricopoulos v. Town  of Orleans, 967 F.2d  14, 16 (1st  Cir.            ____________    ________________            1992) (same; alleged perjury before grand jury and at trial);            see also Butz  v. Economou, 438 U.S. 478, 504 (1978) (stating            ___ ____ ____     ________            that, for purposes of  immunity law, there is  no distinction            between suits brought  against state officials  under    1983            and  suits brought  directly  under the  Constitution against            federal officials).                 Affirmed.                 ________
