Frederick Smith v. Rick McKelvey, et al

Filing

PER CURIAM OPINION FILED - THE COURT: Steven M. Colloton, Pasco M. Bowman and Raymond W. Gruender (UNPUBLISHED) [4433897] [16-1726]

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 16-1726
___________________________
Frederick Smith,
lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
Rick G. McKelvey, Officer; Arkansas State Police Department,
lllllllllllllllllllll Defendants - Appellees.
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Jonesboro
____________
Submitted: August 1, 2016
Filed: August 4, 2016
[Unpublished]
____________
Before COLLOTON, BOWMAN, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Frederick Smith appeals district court’s1 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) dismissal,
without prejudice, of his pro se complaint under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1985. Smith

1

The Honorable D.P. Marshall Jr., United States District Judge for the Eastern
District of Arkansas.

Appellate Case: 16-1726

Page: 1

Date Filed: 08/04/2016 Entry ID: 4433897

also sought to bring claims under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations
Act; under 18 U.S.C. §§ 241, 242; and under Arkansas law.
Upon careful de novo review, see Moore v. Sims, 200 F.3d 1170, 1171 (8th Cir.
2000) (per curiam), we conclude that all of Smith’s federal claims were subject to
dismissal, see Rotella v. Wood, 528 U.S. 549, 553, 557-58 (2000); Linda R.S. v.
Richard D., 410 U.S. 614, 619 (1973); Jones v. Frost, 770 F.3d 1183, 1185 (8th Cir.
2014), and that the district court was warranted in declining to exercise supplemental
jurisdiction over Smith’s state-law claims, see 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c). Accordingly, the
judgment of the district court is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
______________________________

-2-

Appellate Case: 16-1726

Page: 2

Date Filed: 08/04/2016 Entry ID: 4433897