Hollis Carmichael v. C/o King, Sr. In His Individual and Official Capacity

995 F.2d 230 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Hollis CARMICHAEL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. C/O KING, Sr. in his individual and official capacity, Defendant-Appellee. No. 92-17113. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted May 25, 1993. * Decided June 7, 1993. Before: HUG, WIGGINS, and THOMPSON, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Hollis Carmichael, a Nevada state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's summary judgment in favor of the defendant, a senior correctional officer at the Ely state prison, in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. The district court determined that Carmichael had not shown that King subjected him to cruel and unusual punishment, in violation of the eighth amendment. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and review de novo. Hopkins v. Andaya, 958 F.2d 881, 884 (9th Cir.1992). We affirm. 3 A grant of summary judgment should be affirmed only if the evidence, read in the light most favorable to the…