Thomas v. St. Louis Board of Police Commissioners
This text of 319 F. App'x 449 (Thomas v. St. Louis Board of Police Commissioners) 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.
Opinion
Yvonne Thomas appeals following the district court’s 1 entry of judgment on an adverse jury verdict in her action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On appeal, Thomas recounts her trial-testimony version of the underlying incident and alleges that her trial counsel was incompetent and did not effectively represent her. We find no plain error, see Muhammad v. McCarrell, 536 F.3d 934, 938 (8th Cir.2008) (standard of review), because the jury verdict is amply supported by the evidence and Thomas’s appeal is, in essence, an attack on the jury’s credibility determinations, see Kramer v. Logan County Sch. Dist. No. R-1, 157 F.3d 620, 624 (8th Cir.1998) (appeals court does not lightly overturn jury verdict); Anheuser-Busch, Inc. v. John Labatt Ltd., 89 F.3d 1339, 1346 (8th Cir.1996) (this court will not second-guess jury’s credibility determinations).
Finally, Thomas’s argument regarding the competency of her trial counsel is unavailing. See Glick v. Henderson, 855 F.2d 536, 541 (8th Cir.1988) (remedy for ineffective assistance of appointed counsel in civil action is legal malpractice suit).
Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
319 F. App'x 449, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/thomas-v-st-louis-board-of-police-commissioners-ca8-2009.