Gonzales v. City South Houston

Fifth Circuit

Gonzales v. City South Houston

102 F. App'x 404

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedJuly 7, 2004

Docket03-20835

StatusUnpublished

This text of 102 F. App'x 404 (Gonzales v. City South Houston) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Gonzales v. City South Houston, 102 F. App'x 404 (5th Cir. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM: *

Carlos Gonzales, Texas prisoner # 1170418, appeals from the judgment entered in favor of the defendants on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 excessive force claim. Applying the same test as the district court, e.g., Skotak v. Tenneco Resins, Inc., 953 F.2d 909, 912 (5th Cir.1992), we affirm.

We hold that the district court did not err in its determination that Officer Tina Perez was entitled to qualified immunity; brandishing her weapon was objectively reasonable under the circumstances, and Gonzales suffered no injury as a result thereof. Cf. Hinojosa v. City of Terrell, 834 F.2d 1223, 1231 (5th Cir.1988); see Williams v. Bramer, 180 F.3d 699, 703 (5th Cir.), clarified, 186 F.3d 633, 634 (5th Cir.1999). Furthermore, the district court did not err in failing to consider Randy Moore’s statement for purposes of resolving the summary judgment motion. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(e).

Gonzales has inadequately briefed the district court’s Fed.R.Civ.P. 36 application, and that issue is therefore waived. See Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 224-25 (5th Cir.1993). Gonzales has similarly aban *405 doned his excessive force claim against Officer Darrell Flanagan. See id.

Gonzales’s claim that the absence of medical facilities at the City of South Houston Jail constitutes per se deliberate indifference is raised for the first time on appeal and is therefore not considered. See Leverette v. Louisville Ladder Co., 183 F.3d 339, 342 (5th Cir.1999). His claims regarding the medical treatment he received while detained at the Harris County Jail fail as a matter of law because they amount to nothing more than a disagreement over the type of care received. See Gibbs v. Grimmette, 254 F.3d 545, 548-49 (5th Cir.2001).

AFFIRMED.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM: *

Carlos Gonzales, Texas prisoner # 1170418, appeals from the judgment entered in favor of the defendants on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 excessive force claim. Applying the same test as the district court, e.g., Skotak v. Tenneco Resins, Inc., 953 F.2d 909, 912 (5th Cir.1992), we affirm.

We hold that the district court did not err in its determination that Officer Tina Perez was entitled to qualified immunity; brandishing her weapon was objectively reasonable under the circumstances, and Gonzales suffered no injury as a result thereof. Cf. Hinojosa v. City of Terrell, 834 F.2d 1223, 1231 (5th Cir.1988); see Williams v. Bramer, 180 F.3d 699, 703 (5th Cir.), clarified, 186 F.3d 633, 634 (5th Cir.1999). Furthermore, the district court did not err in failing to consider Randy Moore’s statement for purposes of resolving the summary judgment motion. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(e).

Gonzales has inadequately briefed the district court’s Fed.R.Civ.P. 36 application, and that issue is therefore waived. See Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 224-25 (5th Cir.1993). Gonzales has similarly aban *405 doned his excessive force claim against Officer Darrell Flanagan. See id.

Gonzales’s claim that the absence of medical facilities at the City of South Houston Jail constitutes per se deliberate indifference is raised for the first time on appeal and is therefore not considered. See Leverette v. Louisville Ladder Co., 183 F.3d 339, 342 (5th Cir.1999). His claims regarding the medical treatment he received while detained at the Harris County Jail fail as a matter of law because they amount to nothing more than a disagreement over the type of care received. See Gibbs v. Grimmette, 254 F.3d 545, 548-49 (5th Cir.2001).

AFFIRMED.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 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 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

102 F. App'x 404, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gonzales-v-city-south-houston-ca5-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack