Hawkins v. Crane et al
JUDGMENT ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS in toto. Defendants motion for summary judgment 67 is GRANTED, and Plaintiffs cross motion for summary judgment 81 is DENIED. Plaintiffs complaint 1 is therefore DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Signed by Honorable Susan O. Hickey on March 23, 2012. (mfr)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
JERRY LEE HAWKINS
Case No. 4:09-cv-04118
SHERIFF JERRY CRANE; JOHNNY
GODBOLT, Detention Administrator; LT.
BRANDON SMITH; OFFICER JULIAN
BEASELY; CHARLES "CHUCK"
DAVIDSON; SPENCE "MACK" McMORRIS;
OFFICER DUNHAM; and SGT. BLAND
Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation filed February 7, 2012, by the Honorable
Barry A. Bryant, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Arkansas. (ECF No.
91). Judge Bryant recommends that Defendant s’ motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 67) be
granted and Plaintiff’s cross-motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 81) be denied. Plaintiff has
responded with objections. (ECF No. 92).
Plaintiff brings suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and accuses Defendants of failing to protect him
from attack by a fellow inmate while housed in the Hempstead County Detention Center. In his
objections, Plaintiff merely restates his argument that Defendants knew of the attacker’s alleged
violent nature and that they should have been aware that the attacker was on Plaintiff’s “enemies
list.” (ECF No. 92). After a de novo review, the Court finds that Judge Bryant’s Report and
Recommendation adequately addresses these contentions and that Plaintiff’s objections are without
merit. Accordingly, the Court adopts the Report and Recommendation in toto.
Defendants’ motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 67) is GRANTED, and Plaintiff’s
cross motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 81) is DENIED. Plaintiff’s complaint (ECF No. 1)
is therefore DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
IT IS SO ORDERED, this 23rd day of March, 2012.
/s/ Susan O. Hickey
Hon. Susan O. Hickey
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?