Filed: Jul. 09, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 96-10025 Conference Calendar GLENN C. CAMPBELL, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus RUTTIGER, Lt, Employee Clements Unit, Amarillo, Texas; JOHN DOE, Employee, Clements Unit, Amarillo, Texas, Defendants-Appellees. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 2:93-CV-176 - - - - - - - - - - June 27, 1996 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, BARKSDALE, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:*
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 96-10025 Conference Calendar GLENN C. CAMPBELL, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus RUTTIGER, Lt, Employee Clements Unit, Amarillo, Texas; JOHN DOE, Employee, Clements Unit, Amarillo, Texas, Defendants-Appellees. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 2:93-CV-176 - - - - - - - - - - June 27, 1996 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, BARKSDALE, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* G..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-10025
Conference Calendar
GLENN C. CAMPBELL,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
RUTTIGER, Lt, Employee
Clements Unit, Amarillo,
Texas; JOHN DOE, Employee,
Clements Unit, Amarillo,
Texas,
Defendants-Appellees.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 2:93-CV-176
- - - - - - - - - -
June 27, 1996
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, BARKSDALE, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Glenn C. Campbell, Texas state prisoner # 535319, appeals
the dismissal of his civil rights complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(d). Campbell contends that Officer Ruttiger used
excessive force, violating his Eighth Amendment right against
cruel and unusual punishment. We have reviewed the record and
*
Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule
47.5.4.
No. 96-10025
- 2 -
Campbell’s brief and AFFIRM the judgment. See Jackson v.
Culbertson,
984 F.2d 699, 700 (5th Cir. 1993). Campbell’s motion
for appointment of counsel is DENIED because Campbell’s appeal
does not present "exceptional circumstances" that would require
the appointment of counsel. See Ulmer v. Chancellor,
691 F.2d
209, 212 (5th Cir. 1982).
AFFIRMED. MOTION DENIED.