Gabrielle Andrea Dye v. Hennepin Cty. ( 2006 )


Menu:
  •                      United States Court of Appeals
    FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
    ___________
    No. 05-1568
    ___________
    Gabrielle Andrea Dye,                    *
    *
    Appellant,                  *
    *
    v.                                 *
    * Appeal from the United States
    Hennepin County, Minnesota;              * District Court for the
    Patrick D. McGowan, Sheriff;             * District of Minnesota.
    Michele Smolley, Chief Deputy;           * [UNPUBLISHED]
    Thomas Merkel, Inspector;                *
    Richard Estensen, Former                 *
    Inspector, officially and individually,  *
    *
    Appellees.                  *
    ___________
    Submitted: December 15, 2005
    Filed: January 19, 2006
    ___________
    Before BYE, BOWMAN, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.
    ___________
    PER CURIAM.
    Gabrielle Andrea Dye sued Hennepin County and certain county officials under
    42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging her federal constitutional rights were violated due to a ten-
    hour period of detention in the Hennepin County Adult Detention Center (ADC) after
    Dye posted bail. The district court1 granted Hennepin County's motion for summary
    judgment after concluding the length of the delay was objectively reasonable and not
    unconstitutional. Dye filed a timely appeal.
    We are guided and controlled in our disposition of this case by several recent
    decisions involving similar challenges to the outprocessing procedures at the ADC,
    some of which involved a longer period of detention than the period of detention at
    issue in this case. See Lund v. Hennepin County, 
    427 F.3d 1123
    (8th Cir. 2005);
    Russell v. Hennepin County, 
    420 F.3d 841
    (8th Cir. 2005); Golberg v. Hennepin
    County, 
    417 F.3d 808
    (8th Cir. 2005); Luckes v. County of Hennepin, 
    415 F.3d 936
    (8th Cir. 2005); Stepnes v. Hennepin County, No. 05-2059, 
    2005 WL 3113440
    (8th
    Cir. Nov. 22, 2005) (unpublished); and Killingham v. County of Hennepin, No. 04-
    3216, 
    2005 WL 2807117
    (8th Cir. Oct. 28, 2005) (unpublished). All of the issues
    raised by Dye were addressed and decided in Hennepin County's favor in one or more
    of the above cases. We therefore affirm the judgment of the district court in favor of
    Hennepin County in this case.
    ______________________________
    1
    The Honorable Donovan W. Frank, United States District Judge for the District
    of Minnesota.
    -2-