Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-arwd-5_06-cv-05180/USCOURTS-arwd-5_06-cv-05180-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

AO72A

(Rev. 8/82)

-1-

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS

FAYETTEVILLE DIVISION

JOSUE HERNANDEZ PLAINTIFF

v. Civil No. 06-5180

 

SGT. SHARIUM, Bethel Heights

Police Department; and 

SHERIFF KEITH FERGUSON DEFENDANTS

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Josue Hernandez, an inmate in theBenton CountyDetentionCenter (BCDC), brings this

pro se civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. His complaint was filed in forma

pauperis (IFP) and it is now determined whether it should be served upon the defendants. 

On November 3, 2006, the undersigned entered an order directing the plaintiff to

complete, sign, and return an addendum to his complaint (Doc. 5). The addendum was filed on

November 15, 2006 (Doc. 6).

I. Background

Hernandez contends Sgt. Sharium of the Bethel Heights Police Department used

excessive force against him on April 21, 2005. Specifically, Hernandez contends that during a

traffic stop Sharium dragged Hernandez from his vehicle, threw him on the ground, and struck

him across the head with a gun. Addendum at ¶ 3. 

Because Hernandez did not describe any actions taken bySheriff Ferguson, he was asked

to explain in detail how Ferguson violated his federal constitutional rights. Addendum at ¶ 7.

Hernandez replied that Ferguson is the head supervisor over Benton County. Id. As Hernandez

Case 5:06-cv-05180-JRM Document 7 Filed 11/16/06 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: <pageID>
AO72A

(Rev. 8/82)

-2-

was “beaten” by a member of the Bethel Heights Police Department, he contends he fears for his

life everyday while incarcerated in Benton County. Id.

II. Discussion

Hernandez’s claim against Sheriff Ferguson is subject to dismissal. A claim of

deprivation of a constitutional right cannot be based on a respondeatsuperior theory of liability.

See Monell v. New York City Dep't of Soc. Servs., 436 U.S. 658, 694 (1978). 

There is no allegation that Sheriff Ferguson was involved in any way in the actions taken

by Sharium. Sharium is not employed by the Benton County Sheriff’s Office and was not trained

or supervised by Sheriff Ferguson. 

III. Conclusion

Itherefore recommend Hernandez’s claims against Sheriff Ferguson be dismissed on the

grounds that the claims are frivolous and fail to state claims. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i)-

(iii)(IFP action, or anyportion thereof, may be dismissed on such grounds at any time). However,

we note that service of the complaint on Sgt. Sharium will be directed by separate order. 

Hernandez has ten days from receipt of the report and recommendation in which

to file written objections pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The failure to file timely

objections may result in waiver of the right to appeal questions of fact. Hernandez is

reminded that objections must be both timely and specific to trigger de novo review by the

district court.

DATED this 16th day of November 2006.

/s/ Beverly Stites Jones 

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

Case 5:06-cv-05180-JRM Document 7 Filed 11/16/06 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: <pageID>