Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-06-01167/USCOURTS-ca8-06-01167-0/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. 06-1167

___________

Andre Rahim/Hunter, *

*

Appellant, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* Eastern District of Arkansas.

Eric Bowman, CO-I, East Arkansas *

Regional Unit, ADC; Larry Norris, *

Director, Arkansas Department of * [UNPUBLISHED]

Correction; Ray Hobbs, Chief Deputy *

Director, Arkansas Department of *

Correction; G. Harmon, Warden, East *

Arkansas Regional Unit, ADC; Mrs. *

Tobar, Sgt., East Arkansas Regional *

Unit; Arthur Brown, CO-I, East *

Arkansas Regional Unit, ADC, *

*

Appellees. *

___________

Submitted: September 19, 2006

Filed: September 28, 2006

___________

Before WOLLMAN, BEAM, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Appellate Case: 06-1167 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/28/2006 Entry ID: 2094278
1

The Honorable H. David Young, United States Magistrate Judge for the

Eastern District of Arkansas, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by

consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). 

-2-

Inmate Andre Rahim/Hunter appeals the district court’s1

 dismissal of his 42

U.S.C. § 1983 action after a pretrial evidentiary hearing. We grant him in forma

pauperis status, leaving the fee-collection details to the district court. See Henderson

v. Norris, 129 F.3d 481, 483-85 (8th Cir. 1997) (per curiam). We find no abuse of

discretion in the district court’s Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) dismissal

without prejudice of the claims against defendant officers Eric Bowman and Arthur

Brown. See Edwards v. Edwards, 754 F.2d 298, 298 (8th Cir. 1985) (per curiam).

Having carefully reviewed the audiotape of the evidentiary hearing, see Johnson v.

Cowell Steel Structures, Inc., 991 F.2d 474, 478 (8th Cir. 1993), we agree with the

district court’s assessment of Rahim/Hunter’s claims against the remaining parties.

Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

____________________________

Appellate Case: 06-1167 Page: 2 Date Filed: 09/28/2006 Entry ID: 2094278