Free Mandate of 9th Circuit - District Court of Arizona - Arizona


File Size: 69.8 kB
Pages: 3
Date: August 29, 2006
File Format: PDF
State: Arizona
Category: District Court of Arizona
Author: unknown
Word Count: 622 Words, 3,905 Characters
Page Size: 622.08 x 792 pts
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/azd/4747/81.pdf

Download Mandate of 9th Circuit - District Court of Arizona ( 69.8 kB)


Preview Mandate of 9th Circuit - District Court of Arizona
· UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ALVIN LARUE PINKOSON, No. 05-16516 l .
D.C. N0. CV—0O-02436-MHM
Plaintiff- Appellant,
V. .
JUDGMENT
JOSEPH M. ARPAIO, sued in official
capacity; et al.,
Defendants — Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona
(Phoenix).
This cause came on to be heard on the Transcript ofthe Record from the
United States District Court for the District of Arizona (Phoenix) and was duly
submitted.
On consideration _whereoL it is now here ordered and adjudged by this
Court, that the judgment of the said District Court in this cause be, and hereby is
AFFIRMED.
Filed and entered 05/23/06
_,.»#‘*R" $.1
E
ctegsr _ ;
Pin - jp tx Tlilw?
. 2 11% ’°
E} it K
Case 2:00—cv—02436—I\AHIVI—I\AI§€; ent 81 Filed 08/30/2006 Page 1 of 3

Nor Pon PUBLICATION MAY 23 2000
Umrno STATES counr OF APPEALS °“WY$% FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ALVIN LAROUE PINKOSON, No. 05-16516
Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. CV-OO-·02436—MHM
v.
MEMORANDUM"
JOSEPH M. ARPAIO, sued in official
capacity; et al.,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
Mary H. Murguia, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted May 15, 2006 N
Before: B. FLETCHER, TROTT, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
Arizona state prisoner Alvin Laroue Pinkoson appeals pro se from the
district court’s summary judgment in favor of defendants in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983
action alleging defendants violated his Fourteenth Amendment rights by placing
`K This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be
cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
" The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without
oral argument- See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
Case 2:00—cv—02436—I\/IHIVI—IVIEA Document 81 Filed 08/30/2006 Page 2 of 3

him in a "dry cell" during his arraignment hearing. We have jurisdiction under 28
U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Jones v. Blamxs, 393 F.3d 918, 926 (9th Cir.
2004), and we affirm.
The district court properly granted summary judgment on Pink0son’s claim Q
that defendants violated his Fourteenth Amendment rights, because the evidence
taken in the light most favorable to Pinkoson fails to show defendant officers
placed him in the holding cell for the purpose of punishment. See Bell v. Woyish,
441 U.S. 520, 537-38 (1979); Frost v. Agnos, 152 F.3d 1124, 1130 (9th Cir. 1998).
Moreover, because the district court properly concluded there was no constitutional
violation, it also properly granted summary judgment in favor of defendants
Arpaio and the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors. See Quinianilla v. City of
Downey, 84 F.3d 353, 355 (9th Cir. 1996) (concluding judgment in favor of police
chief and city was proper because "an individual may recover under § 1983 only
when his federal rights have been violated").
We decline to consider evidence and arguments presented for the first time
on appeal. See United States v. Elias, 921 F.2d 870, 874 (9th Cir. 1990).
The remaining contentions lack merit.
AFFIRMED. sx ·
, O?tl{(gY’£’O
-r<’—¥l.r‘P*· 6+48
\rP&»gi)l\\*— Oi O
‘~»rQ§?` 2 ? --.._ M C
`ppgnp _ g p nfjf (
`V`\»·T in I ·/J
Case 2:00—cv—02436—I\/IHIVI-IVIEA Document 81 Filed 08/30/2006 Page 3 of 3 ‘
`

Case 2:00-cv-02436-MHM-MEA

Document 81

Filed 08/30/2006

Page 1 of 3

Case 2:00-cv-02436-MHM-MEA

Document 81

Filed 08/30/2006

Page 2 of 3

Case 2:00-cv-02436-MHM-MEA

Document 81

Filed 08/30/2006

Page 3 of 3