Royal D. Ross, Margaret Ross v. Rosscoff Jerry Terlle John Souza Steve Reeves Joe Noose

69 F.3d 541, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 37331, 1995 WL 638328
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedNovember 1, 1995
Docket95-1746
StatusUnpublished

This text of 69 F.3d 541 (Royal D. Ross, Margaret Ross v. Rosscoff Jerry Terlle John Souza Steve Reeves Joe Noose) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Royal D. Ross, Margaret Ross v. Rosscoff Jerry Terlle John Souza Steve Reeves Joe Noose, 69 F.3d 541, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 37331, 1995 WL 638328 (8th Cir. 1995).

Opinion

69 F.3d 541

NOTICE: Eighth Circuit Rule 28A(k) governs citation of unpublished opinions and provides that no party may cite an opinion not intended for publication unless the cases are related by identity between the parties or the causes of action.
Royal D. ROSS, Appellant,
Margaret ROSS, Plaintiff,
v.
ROSSCOFF; Jerry TERLLE; John Souza; Steve Reeves; Joe
Noose, Appellees.

No. 95-1746.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: September 26, 1995.
Filed: November 1, 1995.

Before FAGG, LOKEN, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Royal D. Ross, who is involuntarily confined in a Missouri mental hospital, appeals the district court's1 dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 action. The district court correctly observed and Ross appears to concede that his claim concerning the revocation of his conditional release from the hospital is actually a challenge to his continued confinement under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254. Ross has failed to make the requisite showing that he has no nonfutile state remedies, and thus he is not entitled to habeas relief. See Duvall v. Purkett, 15 F.3d 745, 746 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 114 S.Ct. 2753 (1994); Kolocotronis v. Holcomb, 925 F.2d 278, 279 (8th Cir.1991) (to satisfy exhaustion requirement, person confined in Missouri mental institution must petition state trial court for release and appeal to state appellate courts). Having carefully reviewed the record, we conclude that Ross's remaining section 1983 claims were properly dismissed. Thus, the judgment of the district court is affirmed without further discussion. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

A true copy.

1

The Honorable Scott O. Wright, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri, adopting the report and recommendation of the Honorable William A. Knox, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Missouri

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
69 F.3d 541, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 37331, 1995 WL 638328, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/royal-d-ross-margaret-ross-v-rosscoff-jerry-terlle-ca8-1995.