Tom Henderson v. Sergeant Lambert , 577 F. App'x 633 ( 2014 )


Menu:
  •                 United States Court of Appeals
    For the Eighth Circuit
    ___________________________
    No. 14-2529
    ___________________________
    Tom Edward Henderson
    lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant
    v.
    Sergeant Lambert; Mrs. Jeanetta, both working at the Sebastian County Detention
    Center and both sued in their individual and official capacities
    lllllllllllllllllllll Defendants - Appellees
    ____________
    Appeal from United States District Court
    for the Western District of Arkansas - Ft. Smith
    ____________
    Submitted: September 30, 2014
    Filed: October 3, 2014
    [Unpublished]
    ____________
    Before LOKEN, MELLOY, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.
    ____________
    PER CURIAM.
    Arkansas inmate Tom Henderson appeals the district court’s1 dismissal of his
    
    42 U.S.C. § 1983
     action. Following de novo review, see Moore v. Sims, 
    200 F.3d 1170
    , 1171 (8th Cir. 2000) (per curiam), we affirm, see 8th Cir. R. 47B. We agree
    with the District Court that Henderson did not state a claim, as he did not show
    defendants were deliberately indifferent to his serious medical needs, see Estelle v.
    Gamble, 
    429 U.S. 97
    , 104 (1976), or to conditions posing an “unreasonable risk of
    serious damage to his future health,” see Helling v. McKinney, 
    509 U.S. 25
    , 35
    (1993). We also conclude that the magistrate did not err in denying Henderson leave
    to amend to add claims challenging his conviction, as he requested a sentence
    reduction and thus the claims would be barred by Preiser v. Rodriguez, 
    411 U.S. 475
    ,
    489-90 (1973) (habeas corpus is exclusive remedy for prisoner challenging fact or
    length of confinement). See In re NVE Corp. Sec. Litig., 
    527 F.3d 749
    , 752 (8th Cir.
    2008) (de novo review of denial of motion to amend complaint based on futility).
    Finally, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying
    appointed counsel. See Phillips v. Jasper Cnty. Jail, 
    437 F.3d 791
    , 794 (8th Cir. 2006)
    (standard of review). We also deny as moot Henderson’s appellate motion for
    appointed counsel.
    ______________________________
    1
    The Honorable Robert T. Dawson, United States District Judge for the Western
    District of Arkansas, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable
    James R. Marschewski, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of
    Arkansas.
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 14-2529

Citation Numbers: 577 F. App'x 633

Judges: Loken, Melloy, Gruender

Filed Date: 10/3/2014

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/6/2024