Steven Cody v. Ms. Jacueline Newburn ( 2013 )

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 12-2764
___________________________
Steven Donnelle Cody
lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant
v.
Ms. Jacueline Newburn, Jail Administrator, Clark County Detention Center; Tim
Patterson, Chief Deputy, Clark County Detention Center; Rick Loy, Interim Jail
Administrator, Clark County Detention Center; David Turner, Sheriff, Clark
County; Raymond Moore, Jailer
lllllllllllllllllllll Defendants - Appellees
------------------------------
Steven D. Cody
lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant
v.
Jacueline Newborn, Jail Administrator, Clark County Detention Center; Tim
Patterson, Chief Deputy, Clark County Detention Center; Rick Loy, Jail
Administrator, Clark County Detention Center; David Turner, Sheriff, Clark
County; Officer Moore
lllllllllllllllllllll Defendants - Appellees
------------------------------
Steven Cody
lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant
v.
Rick Loy, Jail Administrator; Ray Winsfield, Chief Deputy
lllllllllllllllllllll Defendants - Appellees
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Western District of Arkansas - Hot Springs
____________
Submitted: April 11, 2013
Filed: April 16, 2013
[Unpublished]
____________
Before WOLLMAN, BOWMAN, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Inmate Steven Donnelle Cody appeals from the order of the District Court,1
entered after an evidentiary hearing, dismissing his consolidated 42 U.S.C. § 1983
actions. Upon careful consideration of Cody’s arguments for reversal, we conclude
that the District Court properly entered judgment for the defendants based on the
hearing evidence. See Holden v. Hirner, 663 F.3d 336, 340–42 (8th Cir. 2011)
1
The Honorable Robert T. Dawson, United States District Judge for the
Western District of Arkansas, adopting the report and recommendation of the
Honorable Barry A. Bryant, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District
of Arkansas.
-2-
(discussing a pretrial detainee’s failure-to-protect claim); Story v. Norwood, 659 F.3d
680, 684–85 (8th Cir. 2011) (reviewing for clear error a district court’s findings of
fact made following an evidentiary hearing, which is the equivalent of a bench trial,
and noting that credibility findings are virtually unreviewable on appeal); Crow v.
Montgomery, 403 F.3d 598, 601–02 (8th Cir. 2005) (explaining that a pretrial
detainee’s conditions-of-confinement claims are analyzed under the same deliberate-
indifference standard as those brought by convicted prisoners: the detainee must show
that conditions posed a substantial risk of serious harm to his health or safety and that
defendants knew of but were deliberately indifferent to this risk).
The judgment of the District Court is affirmed, and Cody’s pending motion is
denied.
______________________________
-3-