Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-04-03736/USCOURTS-ca8-04-03736-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 

---

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 04-3736

___________

Raymond King, Sr., also known as *

Raymond White, *

*

Appellant, *

*

v. *

*

Richard Busby, Sheriff of Crittenden *

County, also known as Dick Busby; *

Robert Cooper, Chief Deputy *

Crittenden County Sheriff’s *

Department, also known as Bob * Appeal from the United States

Cooper, Robert Harper, Sr., * District Court for the 

Administrator, Crittenden County * Eastern District of Arkansas

Detention Facility; Reginald Abram, *

Assistant Administrator, Crittenden * [UNPUBLISHED]

County Detention Facility; Otey, *

Supervisor, Crittenden County *

Detention Facility; Theresa Bonner, *

Supervisor, Crittenden County *

Detention Facility; Angie Whatley, *

Nurse, Crittenden County Detention *

Facility; Gordon, Office Supervisor, *

Crittenden County Detention Facility; *

Dill, Supervisor, Crittenden County *

Detention Facility Defendants, *

*

Appellees. *

___________

Submitted: December 21, 2005

Filed: January 18, 2006

___________

Appellate Case: 04-3736 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/18/2006 Entry ID: 1998092
-2-

Before BYE, McMILLIAN, and RILEY, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Raymond King, a former pretrial detainee at the Crittenden County Jail and now

an Arkansas inmate, appeals from the final judgment entered in the District Court for

the Eastern District of Arkansas dismissing with prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1983

complaint after an evidentiary hearing. For reversal, King argues defendant Nurse

Angie Whatley was never served, he did not have counsel at the hearing, he had

wanted a jury trial, and his missed-medication claim in particular had merit. For the

reasons discussed below, we affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand.

We find no error in the district court’s failure to complete service of process on

Nurse Whatley, given King’s failure to provide her proper address. See Lee v.

Armontrout, 991 F.2d 487, 489 (8th Cir.) (per curiam) (plaintiffs proceeding in forma

pauperis are responsible for providing defendants’ addresses), cert. denied, 510 U.S.

875 (1993). We also find no abuse of discretion in the district court’s denial of King’s

motion for appointment of counsel, as King appeared capable of presenting his claims

and received assistance from the district court at the evidentiary hearing. See Davis

v. Scott, 94 F.3d 444, 447 (8th Cir. 1996) (standard of review; relevant factors in

appointing counsel). 

Because King made an untimely request for a jury trial, we review the district

court’s factual findings for clear error and its legal conclusions de novo. See Choate

v. Lockhart, 7 F.3d 1370, 1373 & n.1 (8th Cir. 1993) (standard of review of

evidentiary hearing held when no jury demand was made). Only King’s missedmedication claim warrants discussion. 

King was housed at the Crittenden County Jail from July 2003 to April 2004.

According to medication logs that defendants submitted, King did not receive his

prescribed blood-pressure or pain medication twelve times from August 18 to October

17, 2003. How often he did not receive his medications after October 17 is unclear--in

Appellate Case: 04-3736 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/18/2006 Entry ID: 1998092
-3-

part because defendants’ medication logs covered only two of the ten months King

was at the Jail--but King testified that he did not receive them “half the time,” and

according to his administrative grievances, he did not receive them at least twenty-six

times from August 28, 2003, to March 8, 2004. See Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97,

104-05 (1976) (deliberate indifference includes intentional interference with

prescribed treatment). The frequency of these missed doses, without further

explanation at least raises an inference, that the failure to provide King’s medication

was more than an “inadvertent failure to provide adequate medical care.” See id. at

105. 

King identified which defendants were responsible for the missed medication:

he grieved repeatedly to Chief Jailer Theresa Bonner, Chief Deputy Sheriff Robert

Cooper, and Jail Administrator Robert Harper about missed doses of his bloodpressure and pain medication. These grievances tend to show that Bonner, Cooper,

and Harper were aware of King’s missed medication and may have failed to take

corrective action because King continued to miss medication doses. See Meloy v.

Bachmeier, 302 F.3d 845, 849 (8th Cir. 2002) (supervisor is liable for Eighth

Amendment violation only when he is personally involved in violation or when his

corrective inaction constitutes deliberate indifference toward violation; supervisor

must know about conduct and facilitate it, approve it, condone it, or turn blind eye to

it). We are troubled by the district court’s conclusion that King failed to show how

the delays in receiving his medication harmed him. King testified that he suffered

headaches and had to lie down when he did not receive his blood-pressure medication,

and he asserts on appeal--rightly so--that he suffered pain from not receiving his pain

medication. 

Accordingly, we affirm the dismissal of all claims and defendants, except for

the missed-medication claim as to defendants Bonner, Cooper, and Harper. We

reverse the dismissal of this claim against these defendants, and we remand for further

proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 04-3736 Page: 3 Date Filed: 01/18/2006 Entry ID: 1998092