Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Cyril Kolocotronis v. Dr. Veera Reddy, 97-8219 (1999)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit Number: 97-8219 Visitors: 50
Filed: Feb. 03, 1999
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 97-8219 _ * Cyril A. Kolocotronis * * Appellant, * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the v. * Eastern District of Missouri * Veera Dr. Reddy, M.D. * [UNPUBLISHED] Psychiat., * * Appellee. * _ Submitted: December 29, 1998 Filed: February 3, 1999 _ Before BEAM, LOKEN, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Cyril A. Kolocotronis filed a 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas action contesting the administration of psyc
More
                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

                                    ___________

                                    No. 97-8219
                                    ___________

                                          *
Cyril A. Kolocotronis                     *
                                          *
             Appellant,                   *   Appeal from the United States
                                          *   District Court for the
      v.                                  *   Eastern District of Missouri
                                          *
Veera Dr. Reddy, M.D.                     *        [UNPUBLISHED]
Psychiat.,                                *
                                          *
             Appellee.                    *


                                    ___________

                  Submitted: December 29, 1998

                     Filed:    February 3, 1999
                                   ___________

Before BEAM, LOKEN, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.
                           ___________

PER CURIAM.

        Cyril A. Kolocotronis filed a 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas action contesting the
administration of psychotropic medication. The district court transferred the petition
to this court because Kolocotronis had not obtained our authorization prior to filing a
successive petition. Although Kolocotronis captioned his complaint as a federal
habeas petition, his claims should have been brought as a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action
challenging forced medication as a condition of his confinement. See Washington v.
Harper, 
494 U.S. 210
(1990); Walton v. Norris, 
59 F.3d 67
(8th Cir. 1998). We
therefore remand this matter to the district court for further consideration of the matter
as a section 1983 claim.


      A true copy.

             Attest:

                     CLERK, U. S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.




                                           -2-

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer