When Plaintiff filed the original complaint in this case, he designated it as
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. In a well-stated order, the district court correctly
dismissed Plaintiff's complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a) and (b). The
district court then granted Plaintiff leave to appeal in forma pauperis.
On appeal, Plaintiff appears to argue that he is also entitled to habeas
corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. He relies on the same facts that he alleged
in the trial court plus some additional facts. While the district court never
addressed this case as one for habeas corpus, after review of the pleadings and
briefs, we conclude that Plaintiff has failed to adequately plead a plausible action
for habeas corpus.
However characterized, we conclude that this action fails. Therefore, the
district court's order dismissing the action is affirmed. The motion for
appointment of counsel is denied.
Appellant is reminded that he is still obligated to finish payment of the
filing fee ordered by the district court.
AFFIRMED.
Entered for the Court
Monroe G. McKay
Circuit Judge
*. This order and judgment is not binding
precedent, except under the
doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court
generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order
and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.
MITCHELL JACK JONES, JR.,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
JULIE MCKENNA, Assistant District
Attorney, Salina, KS; (FNU)
JERKOVICH, Psychiatrist, Salina,
KS; WILLIAM HERMESMEYER,
Public Defender; MARK DINKLE,
Head Public Defender; R E
SCHULMAN, Clinical and Forensic
Psychology; DOUGLAS D.
SHEAFER, Medical Doctor,
Psychiatry; STEVE SHELTON,
Medical Doctor, Psychiatry;
WILLIAM HALE, Medical Doctor,
Psychiatry, SNEHAL SHIMPI,
Medical Doctor, Psychiatry; MARY
ANN ABBOTT, Psychiatry Doctor;
DOLLY WEILLER, Clinical
Psychology; and JANE DOE, Director
of Central Kansas Mental Health,
Defendants - Appellees.
Before SEYMOUR and McKAY, Circuit Judges, and
BRORBY, Senior Circuit
Judge.
After examining the briefs and the appellate record, this panel has
determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the
determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G).
The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.
Click footnote number to return to corresponding location in the text.
| Keyword |
Case |
Docket |
Date: Filed /
Added |
(11645 bytes)
(6730 bytes)
Comments to: WebMaster,
ca10 [at] washburnlaw.edu.
Updated: October 19, 2001.
HTML markup © 2001, Washburn University School of Law.
URL: http://ca10.washburnlaw.edu/cases/2001/10/01-3074.htm.