157 F.3d 1003 (5th Cir. 1998), 97-41237, Davis v. Scott

Docket Nº:97-41237.
Citation:157 F.3d 1003
Party Name:Robert DAVIS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Wayne SCOTT, Director, et al., Defendants, v. UNIDENTIFIED DAWSON, Correction Officer III; Unidentified Crowder, Correction Officer, III, Defendants-Appellees.
Case Date:October 22, 1998
Court:United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
 
FREE EXCERPT

Page 1003

157 F.3d 1003 (5th Cir. 1998)

Robert DAVIS, Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

Wayne SCOTT, Director, et al., Defendants,

v.

UNIDENTIFIED DAWSON, Correction Officer III; Unidentified

Crowder, Correction Officer, III, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 97-41237.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit

October 22, 1998

Page 1004

Robert Davis, Huntsville, TX, pro se.

Jean Shieh Wong, Austin, TX, for Defendants-Appellees.

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

Before REYNALDO G. GARZA, JONES and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.

EDITH H. JONES, Circuit Judge:

Appellant Robert Davis, a Texas prisoner, sued prison guards and their supervisors, alleging unconstitutional conditions of confinement in a crisis management cell at the Coffield Unit. After an evidentiary hearing, the magistrate judge dismissed with prejudice Davis's pro se, in forma pauperis complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. We affirm the dismissal because Davis has failed to assert a claim cognizable under the Eighth Amendment.

I

On May 14, 1996, defendant Officers Dawson and Crowder took Davis to a "crisis management cell" for "throwing liquid substances on the officers." (Spears hearing transcript at 4.) Because the cell had no light and electrical wires were hanging from the outlet, Davis asked to be put in a different cell. The second management cell to which he was taken was, according to Davis, "just filthy," with "blood on the walls and excretion on the floors and bread loaf on the floor." (Id. at 5.) Although Davis complained about this cell as well, he was given cleaning supplies and kept in the cell for three days.

Davis's suit alleged that the conditions in the management cells "bring[ ] forth hatred and hostility," but the officers "are not trained to handle [the resulting] psyc[h]otic situations." (R. 4.) Davis sought punitive and psychological damages. He also asked that the management cells be abolished and that the staff be trained adequately "to deal

Page 1005

with and confront psyc[h]ological problems." (R. 3.)

Davis's case was transferred to a magistrate judge for pretrial purposes. At an evidentiary hearing held pursuant to Spears v. McCotter, 766 F.2d 179 (5th Cir.1985), Davis consented to proceed to final judgment before the magistrate judge. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). At this hearing, the magistrate judge...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP