
USCA1 Opinion

	




          April 3, 1996                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT                                 ____________________        No. 95-2163                                    JAMES W. VOGT,                                Plaintiff, Appellant,                                          v.                             NANCY J. CHURCHILL, et al.,                                Defendants, Appellees.                                 ____________________                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT                              FOR THE DISTRICT OF MAINE                     [Hon. D. Brock Hornby, U.S. District Judge]                                            ___________________                                 ____________________                                        Before                                 Selya, Cyr and Lynch,                                   Circuit Judges.                                   ______________                                 ____________________            James W. Vogt, on brief pro se.            _____________            Andrew  Ketterer,  Attorney  General,   Leanne  Robbin,  Assistant            ________________                        ______________        Attorney General, and Thomas D. Warren, Assistant Attorney General, on                              ________________        brief for appellees, Field, Carpenter, and Rushlaw.            Elizabeth G. Stouder,  Thomas R. McKeon, and Richardson,  Whitman,            ____________________   ________________      _____________________        Large & Badger, on brief for appellee, Nancy J. Churchill.        ______________            Mark G.  Lavoie, Peter  J. DeTroy,  David I.  Herzer, and  Norman,            _______________  ________________   ________________       _______        Hanson & DeTroy, on brief for appellee, Elizabeth Scheffee.        _______________            Kenneth  P.  Altshuler  and  Altshuler  &  Vincent  on  brief  for            ______________________       _____________________        appellee, Lynda Doyle.            Craig  J. Rancourt and  Law Office of  Craig J.  Rancourt on brief            __________________      _________________________________        for appellee, Joseph Molnar.                                 ____________________                                 ____________________                 Per Curiam.   Plaintiff/appellant James W.  Vogt appeals                 __________            the entry of judgment by the United States District Court for            the  District of  Maine for  defendants/appellees.   Vogt had            sought  both damages  and injunctive  relief, pursuant  to 42            U.S.C.    1983, for alleged injuries stemming  from a divorce            and custody proceeding  in state court.   We summarily affirm            essentially  for the reasons given by the district court.  We            add only the following.                 The sole colorable constitutional issue raised in Vogt's            complaint is a violation of his  right to a fair trial due to            an  alleged conspiracy  among  appellants.   As the  district            court correctly  determined,  Vogt  alleges  a  violation  of            procedural due process.  See Senra v. Cunningham, 9 F.3d 168,                                     ___ _____    __________            173 (1st Cir. 1993) (claim of "'distortion and corruption  of            the process  of law', such  as 'falsification of  evidence or            some  other egregious conduct resulting in a denial of a fair            trial'"  constitutes procedural  due process  claim) (quoting            Torres  v. Superintendent of  Police, 893 F.2d  404, 410 (1st            ______     _________________________            Cir. 1990)).  Since the state of Maine provides Vogt with  an            adequate remedy for  any errors  in his  state trial,  either            through direct  appeal or  through a motion  for relief  from            judgment, Vogt's  claim must fail. See  Perez-Ruiz v. Crespo-                                               ___  __________    _______            Guillen, 25  F.3d 40,  42-43  (1st Cir.  1994) (existence  of            _______            adequate  state postdeprivation remedy  fatal to section 1983            procedural due  process claim); see also  Holloway v. Walker,                                            ___ ____  ________    ______            784  F.2d 1287, 1290-93 (5th  Cir.) (right to appeal judgment                                         -2-            in state court precludes   1983 suit for alleged violation of            right to fair trial), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 984 (1986).                                  _____ ______                 Affirmed.  See 1st Cir. Loc. R. 27.1.                 ________   ___                                         -3-
