Filed: Jul. 11, 1995
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 95-40030 Conference Calendar _ GLENN PURVIS WYATT, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus JAMES SHAW, Warden, ET AL. Defendants-Appellees. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 6:94-CV-134 - - - - - - - - - - June 30, 1995 Before JONES, WIENER, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Glenn Purvis Wyatt filed a civil rights complaint, 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging th
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 95-40030 Conference Calendar _ GLENN PURVIS WYATT, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus JAMES SHAW, Warden, ET AL. Defendants-Appellees. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 6:94-CV-134 - - - - - - - - - - June 30, 1995 Before JONES, WIENER, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Glenn Purvis Wyatt filed a civil rights complaint, 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging tha..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
__________________
No. 95-40030
Conference Calendar
__________________
GLENN PURVIS WYATT,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
JAMES SHAW, Warden, ET AL.
Defendants-Appellees.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Texas
USDC No. 6:94-CV-134
- - - - - - - - - -
June 30, 1995
Before JONES, WIENER, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Glenn Purvis Wyatt filed a civil rights complaint, 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983, alleging that prison officials used a chemical agent in
violation of the Eighth Amendment, prison regulations, and the
Ruiz settlement. The district court dismissed the complaint as
frivolous.
This court reviews a prisoner's allegations challenging the
conditions of confinement under the "deliberate indifference"
standard. Wilson v. Seiter,
501 U.S. 294, 303 (1991). A prison
official acts with deliberate indifference under the Eighth
*
Local Rule 47.5 provides: "The publication of opinions
that have no precedential value and merely decide particular
cases on the basis of well-settled principles of law imposes
needless expense on the public and burdens on the legal
profession." Pursuant to that Rule, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published.
No. 95-40030
-2-
Amendment "only if he knows that [an] inmate[] face[s] a
substantial risk of serious harm and [he] disregards that risk by
failing to take reasonable measures to abate it." Farmer v.
Brennan,
114 S. Ct. 1970, 1984 (1994).
A review of the record, including a transcript of the Spears
hearing, establishes that prison officials were faced with an
escalating disturbance requiring a quick response and Wyatt
suffered only temporary, de minimis injuries as a result of his
exposure to the residual effects of the chemical agent. The
district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing as
frivolous his Eighth Amendment claim. See Jackson v. Culbertson,
984 F.2d 699, 700 (5th Cir. 1993).
Wyatt argues that he suffered a psychological injury as a
result of the incident. He has not alleged any facts to
establish that the prison guards intended to harm him, and his
allegations cannot rise to the level of a constitutional
violation. See Oliver v. Collins,
914 F.2d 56, 60 (5th Cir.
1990).
Wyatt also argues that the chemical agent was used in
violation of prison regulations or the Ruiz settlement. An
alleged violation of a prison regulation without more does not
give rise to a constitutional violation, Hernandez v. Estelle,
788 F.2d 1154, 1158 (5th Cir. 1986), and remedial court orders
are a means of correcting constitutional violations, but do not
create or enlarge constitutional rights. Green v. McKaskle,
788
F.2d 1116, 1123 (5th Cir. 1986).
AFFIRMED; motion for de novo review DENIED.