Hanoi Acosta v. Maricopa County Sheriff's Offi

Good Law
466 F. App'x 556
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 23, 201110-16723California316 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Hanoi Barbara Acosta, a federal prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action seeking damages for psychological harm, punitive damages, and injunctive relief for alleged Fourth and Eighth Amendment violations during a prison strip search. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo, Biodiversity Legal Found, v. Badgley, 309 F.3d 1166 , 1173, 1175 (9th Cir.2002), and we affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Acosta’s claim for damages for psychological harm because Acosta did not raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether he sustained the necessary physical injury to support a claim for compensatory damages for psychological harm, and thus his claim is barred under the Prison Litigation Reform Act. See 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(e); see also Oliver v. Keller, 289 F.3d 623, 625-28 (9th Cir.2002).

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Acosta’s claim for punitive damages because Acosta did not raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether individual defendants acted with the requisite level of culpability to justify a punitive damages award, see…

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.