Case ID: f-appx_338/html/0424-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM: \n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Eddie SHORTY, Plaintiff-Appellant v. Jimmy MELTON, Captain, Watch Commander, in his personal and official capacity; Anthony Taylor, Lieutenant, Escort Team, in his personal and official capacity; Lola Nelson, Lieutenant, Disciplinary Chairperson, in his personal and official capacity; Lawrence Kelly, Superintendent, in his personal and official capacity, Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 08-60797
    Summary Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    July 24, 2009.
    
      Eddie Shorty, Parchman, MS, pro se.
    John Lewis Clay, Office of the Attorney General for the State of Mississippi, Jackson, MS, Leonard Charlton Vincent, Mississippi Department of Corrections, Staff Attorney’s Office, Parchman, MS, for Defendants-Appellees.
    Before GARWOOD, SMITH and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Eddie Shorty, Mississippi prisoner # 26507, proceeding pro se, appeals the dismissal of his pro se, in forma pauperis (IFP) civil rights complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i), § 1915(g). Shorty’s complaint alleged, inter alia, that the confiscation of his bedding for eighteen days and of his clothing for over two months in the winter of 2007, forcing him “to sleep on a concrete slab with only my shorts in the winter,” violated his rights under the Eighth Amendment.

Given the liberality to be afforded pro se pleadings and the absence of a Spears hearing or the like, we conclude that this sua sponte dismissal for failure to state a claim, without leave to amend, was error. See, e.g., Wilson v. Seiter, 501 U.S. 294, 111 S.Ct. 2321, 2326-27, 115 L.Ed.2d 271 (1991); Helling v. McKinney, 509 U.S. 25, 113 S.Ct. 2475, 2480, 125 L.Ed.2d 22 (1993).

The district court’s judgment is vacated and the cause is remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent herewith.

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       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.