Gipson v. Williamson , 253 F. App'x 461 ( 2007 )


Menu:
  •           IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals
    Fifth Circuit
    FILED
    November 8, 2007
    No. 06-61034
    Summary Calendar               Charles R. Fulbruge III
    Clerk
    JAMES ALTON GIPSON
    Plaintiff-Appellee
    v.
    ROCKY WILLIAMSON, Officer; DERRICK MINGO; ALANDO SELLERS,
    Officer
    Defendants-Appellants
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Southern District of Mississippi
    USDC No. 2:04-CV-00213
    Before HIGGINBOTHAM, STEWART, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:*
    James Alton Gipson, Mississippi prisoner # 21821, filed a 
    42 U.S.C. § 1983
    complaint in which he asserted, inter alia, an excessive force claim against
    Rocky Williamson, Derrick Mingo, and Alando Sellers, correctional officers at the
    Marion/Walthall Correctional Facility (MWCF). Williamson, Mingo, and Sellers
    now appeal the district court’s rejection of the qualified immunity defense
    *
    Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion
    should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited
    circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
    No. 06-61034
    asserted in their motion for summary judgment.        See Hampton v. Oktibbeha
    County Sheriff Dep’t, 
    480 F.3d 358
    , 363 (5th Cir. 2007).
    The district court’s finding that there was insufficient evidence in the
    record to analyze the issue of the reasonableness of the appellants’ conduct
    determined only a question of “evidence sufficiency.” See Johnson v. Jones, 
    515 U.S. 304
    , 313 (1995). As such, it is not a final, appealable order. See 
    id.
     “Unlike
    denials of qualified immunity which are immediately appealable because they
    turn on an issue of law,” Boulos v. Wilson, 
    834 F.2d 504
    , 509 (5th Cir. 1987)
    (citing Mitchell v. Forsyth, 
    472 U.S. 511
     (1985)), the appellants’ immunity
    defense turns on the factual issue “whether force was applied in a good faith
    effort to maintain or restore discipline, or maliciously and sadistically for the
    very purpose of causing harm.” Valencia v. Wiggins, 
    981 F.2d 1440
    , 1446 (5th
    Cir. 1993) (internal quotation marks and footnote citations omitted). As the
    presence of a genuine issue of material fact regarding qualified immunity
    precludes this court from exercising jurisdiction, this appeal must be dismissed.
    Johnson, 
    515 U.S. at 313-20
    .
    APPEAL DISMISSED.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 06-61034

Citation Numbers: 253 F. App'x 461

Judges: Higginbotham, Stewart, Owen

Filed Date: 11/8/2007

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024