Alfonso Jacson v. Sheryl Foster

Good Law
372 F. App'x 770
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 30, 201008-17165California454 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Alfonso Jackson, a Nevada state prison er, appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing with prejudice his excessive force claim and summarily adjudicating his claims of deliberate indifference to his medical needs and safety in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo the district court’s dismissal of claims under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir.2000), and its grant of summary judgment, Huseman v. Icicle Seafoods, Inc., 471 F.3d 1116, 1120 (9th Cir.2006). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Jackson’s excessive force claim because inmate Doakes did not act under color of state law under any formulation of the governmental actor tests. See Johnson v. Knowles, 113 F.3d 1114, 1118-20 (9th Cir.1997). The district court properly granted summary judgment on Jackson’s claim for deliberate indifference to safety against Officer Hollingsworth, Officer Anderson, Associate Warden Foster, and Athletic Specialist Ferguson because Jackson did not raise a triable issue that they could have known of or disregarded the risk that inmate Doakes might unexpectedly punch…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.