Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-05-01916/USCOURTS-ca8-05-01916-0/pdf.json

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

---

1

The Honorable Robert T. Dawson, United States District Judge for the

Western District of Arkansas, adopting the report and recommendation of the

Honorable Beverly Stites Jones, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western

District of Arkansas.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 05-1916

___________

Ray Armando Murillo, *

*

Appellant, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* Western District of Arkansas.

Liz and Stan Bail Bonds, Inc.; Stan *

Wood, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Appellees. *

___________

Submitted: June 28, 2005

Filed: July 8, 2005

___________

Before MELLOY, McMILLIAN, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Ray Armando Murillo, a former Arkansas prisoner, appeals the district court’s1

dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Murillo claimed defendants violated his

civil rights by misusing and misplacing bond money that was sent to them for

Appellate Case: 05-1916 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/08/2005 Entry ID: 1925573
-2-

Murillo’s release. For reversal, he argues that the defendants are state actors because

they are licensed by the state. 

Upon a thorough review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we conclude that

dismissal was proper. The acts of receiving bail money and applying it to the bond

of a prisoner are not traditional government actions but rather, those of a private

citizen or corporation. Cf. Dean v. Olibas, 129 F.3d 1001, 1005-06 (8th Cir. 1997);

Landry v. A-Able Bonding, Inc., 75 F.3d 200, 204-05 (5th Cir. 1996). Moreover, the

licensing and regulation of bail bondsmen do not transform bail bondsmen into state

actors. See Blum v. Yaretsky, 457 U.S. 991, 1004-05 (1982); Bilal v. Kaplan, 904

F.2d 14, 15 (8th Cir. 1990). 

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

______________________________

Appellate Case: 05-1916 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/08/2005 Entry ID: 1925573