Blasingame v. Jones et al
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 4 dismissing the complaint without prejudice. This dismissal is a strike. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 8/28/13. (kpr)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
PINE BLUFF DIVISION
FRANK JAMES BLASINGAME
ADC # 140321
JOY JONES, Correctional Sergeant,
ADC, Delta Unit; JAMES T. BANKS,
Head Warden, ADC, Delta Unit;
RAYMOND NAYLOR, Disciplinary
Hearing Administrator, ADC; and
JAMES BANKS, Security Warden, ADC,
The Court has considered Magistrate Judge H. David Young's
proposed findings and recommendations, NQ 4, and Blasingame's objections,
NQ 5. On de novo review, the Court adopts Judge Young's recommendations,
modified to a dismissal without prejudice and with a supplement.
CIV. P. 72(b)(3). While it is unfair that Blasingame was not allowed to present
evidence from the officer witness whom Blasingame says would have
exonerated him, the evidentiary burden established by precedent is so
minimal in the prison-discipline context that the witness's absence did not
offend the Constitution. Blasingame says in his objection that ADC is
depriving him of TV and radio access in his cell, serves cold and poorly
proportioned food, and provides inadequate medical care. NQ 5 at 2. And
other inmates, he continues, prevent his use of the prison yard. Ibid. To the
extent Blasingame intends to raise new Eighth Amendment claims with these
statements, they are rejected; the allegations are much too thin to state a claim.
R. Crv. P. 12(b)(6). Blasingame's complaint, NQ 2, is dismissed without
prejudice. This dismissal is a strike. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).
D.P. Marshall Jr.
United States District Judge
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?