Case ID: f-appx_543/html/0724-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Derrick Lee BILLUPS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. LOMELI, Defendant-Appellee.
    No. 12-17016.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Oct. 15, 2013.
    
    Filed Oct. 25, 2013.
    Derrick Lee Billups, Avenal, CA, pro se.
    Monica N. Anderson, Esquire, Supervising Deputy Attorney General, Jessica Soo-jin Kim, Deputy Attorney General, Office of the California Attorney General, Sacramento, CA, for Defendant-Appellee.
    Before: FISHER, GOULD, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

California state prisoner Derrick Lee Billups appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment following a jury trial in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that defendant violated his Eighth Amendment rights. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion evidentiary rulings and will reverse only if an erroneous ruling was prejudicial. Allstate Ins. Co. v. Herron, 634 F.3d 1101, 1110 (9th Cir.2011). We affirm.

Billups’s contention that his trial exhibits were improperly excluded by the district court is unavailing as Billups has not shown that the exclusions “more probably than not” caused his trial to result in a tainted verdict. McEuin v. Crown Equip. Corp., 328 F.3d 1028, 1032 (9th Cir.2003).

Billups’s contention that the district court did not allow him to subpoena witnesses is unsupported by the record.

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.