Albert Bell v. John McCord ( 2000 )


Menu:
  •                    United States Court of Appeals
    FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
    _____________
    No. 99-1430EA
    _____________
    Albert Bell,                             *
    *
    Appellant,                 *
    *
    v.                                *
    *
    John McCord, Investigator, Arkansas      *
    State Police; John Howell, Investigator, *
    Arkansas State Police; David Box,        * On Appeal from the United
    Sheriff's Deputy, Arkansas County;       * States District Court
    Lloyd Franklin, Investigator, Arkansas * for the Eastern District
    State Police; Wayne Simpson, Sheriff, * of Arkansas.
    Arkansas County Police Department;       *
    Gary Allen, Investigator, Arkansas       * [Not To Be Published]
    State Police; Donnie Stephens, Sheriff's *
    Deputy, Arkansas County; Robert          *
    Dittrich, Prosecuting Attorney,          *
    Arkansas County; and Joey Plafcan,       *
    Officer, Sheriff's Department; Arkansas *
    County,                                  *
    *
    Appellees.                 *
    ___________
    Submitted: May 2, 2000
    Filed: May 11, 2000
    ___________
    Before RICHARD S. ARNOLD, BOWMAN, and BEAM, Circuit Judges.
    ___________
    PER CURIAM.
    Albert Bell appeals from the District Court’s1 adverse grant of summary
    judgment, and the denial of his motions to reopen and for leave to file an amended
    complaint, in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action against various Arkansas State and Arkansas
    County, Arkansas, officials. He argues the District Court erred in concluding his state
    criminal conviction, see State v. Bell, 
    329 Ark. 422
    , 
    948 S.W.2d 557
    (1997), was a
    complete defense to any allegation that defendants lacked probable cause to arrest or
    detain him on two days in January 1993. Having carefully reviewed the record and the
    parties’ briefs, we conclude the District Court’s rulings are proper. See Williams v.
    Little Rock Mun. Water Works, 
    21 F.3d 218
    , 225 (8th Cir. 1994) (“Good reason to
    deny leave to amend exists if the amendment would be futile.”); Malady v. Crunk, 
    902 F.2d 10
    , 11 (8th Cir. 1990) (adopting common-law rule that conviction of offense for
    which arrest is made is complete defense to § 1983 action asserting arrest was made
    without probable cause).
    Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
    A true copy.
    Attest:
    CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
    1
    The Honorable Stephen M. Reasoner, United States District Judge for the
    Eastern District of Arkansas.
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 99-1430

Filed Date: 5/11/2000

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/18/2021