Mitchell v. Mills

Filing 7

ORDER dismissing 2 Complaint without prejudice for failure to state a claim. The dismissal constitutes a strike. The Court certifies that an in forma pauperis appeal from this Order or the accompanying Judgment would not be taken in good faith. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) and (g). Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 12/20/2013. (jak)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
JONESBORO DIVISION

KEVIN MARTIN MITCHELL, SR.
ADC#500399

PLAINTIFF

No. 3:13-cv-238-DPM-JTR

v.

LARRY MILLS, Sheriff, Poinsett County
Detention Center and DOYLE RAMEY,
Officer, Poinsett County Detention Center

DEFENDANTS

ORDER
1.

Mitchell has filed a prose§ 1983 complaint alleging that Mills and

Ramey violated his constitutional rights while he was a prisoner in the
Poinsett County Detention Center. The Court must screen his complaint. 28
U.S.C. § 1915A.
2.

Mitchell alleges that Officer Ramey gave him medication that was

prescribed for his cell mate. NQ 2 at 4. After the error was discovered,
Mitchell was taken to a hospital for unspecified medical treatment. A § 1983
claim for constitutionally inadequate medical care must be based on
deliberate indifference, not a mere negligent act. Langford v. Norris, 614 F.3d
445, 460 (8th Cir. 2010); Gibson v. Weber, 433 F.3d 642, 646 (8th Cir. 2006);
-1-

Zentmyer v. Kendall County, Illinois,220 F.3d 805,811 (8th Cir. 2000). Nothing
in the complaint suggests that Ramey acted with deliberate indifference when
he accidentally gave Mitchell the wrong medication on a single occasion.
Mitchell therefore has not pleaded a plausible§ 1983 claim against Ramey.
3.

Mitchell has not alleged any facts suggesting that Sheriff Mills

personally violated his constitutional rights in any manner. Ashcroft v. Iqbal,
556 U.S. 662, 676 (2009); Parrish v. Ball, 594 F.3d 993, 1002 (8th Cir. 2010). He
therefore has failed to plead a plausible § 1983 claim for relief against Mills.

***
Mitchell's complaint is dismissed without prejudice for failure to state
a claim. The dismissal constitutes a strike. The Court certifies that an in forma

pauperis appeal from this Order or the accompanyingJudgmentwould not be
taken in good faith. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) and (g).
So Ordered.
D.P. Marshall Jr.
United States District Judge
20 December 2013

-2-