Billy Scales v. Marva Davis, et al

Filing 920100503

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 09-3237 ___________ Billy Scales, Plaintiff ­ Appellant, v. Marva Davis, Special Administrator, individually and in official capacity; Randy Manus, Assistant Warden, Pine Bluff Unit, ADC, individually and in official capacity; Mark Taylor, Supervisor of Work Release Program, Pine Bluff Unit, ADC, individually and in official capacity; Marvin Evans, Warden, Pine Bluff Unit, in official capacity, Defendants ­ Appellees. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas.

[UNPUBLISHED]

___________ Submitted: April 16, 2010 Filed: May 3, 2010 ___________ Before WOLLMAN, MURPHY, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges. ___________ PER CURIAM.

Billy Scales filed this action against officials of the Arkansas Department of Correction pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, charging them with violating his constitutional right to due process by removing him from a work release program without a hearing and then transferring him to another prison unit after he filed a grievance about the incident. The district court1 granted summary judgment to the officials. After careful de novo review, see Carraher v. Target Corp., 503 F.3d 714, 716 (8th Cir. 2007), we agree in all respects with the well reasoned opinion of the magistrate judge. Scales had no constitutionally cognizable liberty interest in remaining in the work release program, for he was incarcerated at the time and his removal did not amount to an atypical condition of confinement or lengthen his imprisonment. See Callender v. Sioux City Residential Treatment Facility, 88 F.3d 666, 668­69 (8th Cir. 1996). Nor could he assert a protectable liberty interest in having the ADC officials follow their own regulations or policies. See Phillips v. Norris, 320 F.3d 844, 847 (8th Cir. 2003). Furthermore, since Scales has produced no evidence identifying any official responsible for his transfer, his retaliation claim fails as a matter of law. See Atkinson v. Bohn, 91 F.3d 1127, 1129 (8th Cir. 1996). Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. ______________________________

The Honorable Henry L. Jones, Jr., United States Magistrate Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas, presiding. -2-

1