Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-91-05080/USCOURTS-ca10-91-05080-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 

---

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

TENTH CIRCUIT FEBO 5 1992 

ROBERT L. HOECKEE 

Clerk 

JOSEPH ANGELO DICESARE, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v. 

DOUG NICHOLS, BILLY MCCLENDON, 

W.T. SMITH, ROGER BOMMER, and 

DARREL NEWMAN, 

Defendants-Appellees. 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

No. 91-5080 

(D.C. No. 90-C-983-E) 

(N.D. Oklahoma) 

Before LOGAN, BARRETT and EBEL, Circuit Judges. 

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel 

has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially 

assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App . P. 

34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9 . The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. 

Plaintiff Joseph Angelo Dicesare brought this civil rights 

action under 42 u.s.c . § 1983 against the sheriff, jailers and 

county commissioners of Creek County, Oklahoma, for alleged 

violations of his civil rights while he spent approximately 

* This order and judgment has no precedential value and shall not 

be cited, or used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, except 

for purposes of establishing the doctrines of the law of the case, 

res judicata, or collateral estoppel . 10th Cir. R. 36.3. 

Appellate Case: 91-5080 Document: 010110221738 Date Filed: 02/05/1992 Page: 1 
sixteen hours in the county jail there. His complaint alleged 

that the sheriff and jailers subjected him to cruel and unusual 

punishment and recklessly disregarded his medical needs; he 

attempted to hold the county commissioners liable on the basis of 

their "less than adequate supervision" of the other defendants. 

After obtaining a Martinez report on the incidents giving rise to 

the claim, the district court dismissed the action as frivolous 

under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d). 

Taking the view of the facts most favorable to plaintiff, we 

are satisfied that he has not stated a claim for violation of his 

constitutional rights. Initially housed in a single cell because 

he was regarded as a flight risk, plaintiff was placed in the 

general population of the jail when inmates in another cell set 

fire to their mattresses with contraband matches. Apparently the 

prisoners thought to be the culprits were placed in plaintiff's 

former cell. During his presence in the general population of the 

jail plaintiff sustained a soft tissue jaw injury, but no broken 

bones, in a fight with one or more of the inmates. Plaintiff 

asserts that the jailers did not take him to a hospital until 

seven or eight hours after the incident; the doctor's notes in the 

Martinez report indicated that plaintiff represented to the doctor 

that the altercation occurred approximately an hour before he 

treated plaintiff at the emergency room of the local hospital, 

where his head and jaw were also x-rayed. The physician 

prescribed a pain medication (Tylenol) and an ice pack. Plaintiff 

asserts that defendants never gave him the ice pack or pain 

medication. Since plaintiff spent only sixteen hours total in the 

-2-

Appellate Case: 91-5080 Document: 010110221738 Date Filed: 02/05/1992 Page: 2 
Creek County jail his transfer from defendants' custody obviously 

occurred shortly after his emergency room treatment . 

While plaintiff uses terms such as "reckless disregard" and 

"callous indifference" in describing defendants' actions or 

failure to act, his complaint shows no intentional disregard of a 

serious medical need of the level necessary to state a 

constitutional violation. See Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U. S . 97 

(1976) (in Eighth Amendment claim concerning medical needs, 

standard is deliberate indi fference) ; cf. Wilson v. Seiter, 111 

S. Ct. 2321, 2327 (1991). 

AFFIRMED. 

The mandate shall issue forthwith. 

-3-

Entered for the Court 

James K. Logan 

Circuit Judge 

Appellate Case: 91-5080 Document: 010110221738 Date Filed: 02/05/1992 Page: 3