Narrative Opinion Summary
Anthony Dean Jackson, an Arizona state prisoner, appeals the district court's summary judgment favoring the police department in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Jackson alleges that during a six-hour detainment, officers were deliberately indifferent to a serious medical need regarding a wound on his little finger. The court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and reviews the case de novo. The appeal is affirmed because Jackson did not establish a genuine issue of material fact regarding the police officers' alleged deliberate indifference to his medical needs. Relevant case law, including McGuckin v. Smith and Frost v. Agnos, supports the conclusion that the treatment Jackson received did not meet the threshold for deliberate indifference under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments. The decision is not intended for publication and cannot be cited in future cases except as permitted by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Legal Issues Addressed
Appellate Review Standards under 28 U.S.C. § 1291subscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellate court conducted a de novo review of the district court's summary judgment decision, affirming the lower court's ruling based on the absence of a material factual dispute.
Reasoning: The court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and reviews the case de novo.
Deliberate Indifference to Medical Needs under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendmentssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court determined that the police officers' actions did not constitute deliberate indifference to Jackson's medical needs, as the treatment he received did not reach the threshold required under established case law.
Reasoning: The appeal is affirmed because Jackson did not establish a genuine issue of material fact regarding the police officers' alleged deliberate indifference to his medical needs.
Precedential Limitations of Unpublished Decisionssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court clarified that the decision is not intended for publication and cannot be cited in future cases, except as permitted by local rules.
Reasoning: The decision is not intended for publication and cannot be cited in future cases except as permitted by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Summary Judgment in Civil Rights Claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983subscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The district court's decision to grant summary judgment in favor of the police department was upheld because Jackson failed to demonstrate a genuine issue of material fact concerning the alleged rights violation.
Reasoning: Anthony Dean Jackson, an Arizona state prisoner, appeals the district court's summary judgment favoring the police department in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action.