*81 OPINION

Pro se appellant, Jose Fremonde Xenos, filed the underlying action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Nuria Slojund, Esq., his court-appointed appellate attorney. Xenos complained about Slojund’s actions during the course of his appeal from a state criminal proceeding which apparently ended adversely to him. The District Court dismissed Xenos’ complaint sua sponte for lack of legal merit in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e). For the reasons provided by the District Court, we agree and will affirm.

As the District Court explained, a defense attorney “does not act under color of state law when performing a lawyer’s traditional functions as counsel in a criminal proceeding.” Polk County v. Dodson, 454 U.S. 312, 325, 102 S.Ct. 445, 70 L.Ed.2d 509 (1981). Because the complaint contains no allegations to suggest that Slojund is a state actor properly sued under § 1983, we conclude that the District Court did not err in dismissing Xenos’ complaint. 1 Accordingly, we will summarily affirm the judgment of the District Court as no substantial question is presented by this appeal. See Third Circuit LAR 27.4 and I.O.P. 10.6.