Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-91-04044/USCOURTS-ca10-91-04044-0/pdf.json

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

---

FI LED 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT 

United States Court of Appeals 

Tench Circuit 

P.UG 5 1991 

.ROBERT L. HOECKER 

Clerk 

ROBERT HASTON, ) 

) 

Plaintiff-Appellant, ) 

) 

V • ) 

) 

GARY DELAND, individually and in his ) 

capacity as Director of the Department ) 

of Corrections; BLEN FREESTONE, ) 

individually and in the capacity as ) 

Medical Administrator of the Utah State) 

Prison; RICHARD DESPAIN, individually ) 

and in his capacity as Medical Adminis-) 

trator of the Utah State Prison; DR. VAN) 

AUSTIN, individually and in his capacity) 

as Prison Psychiatrist of the Utah State) 

Prison; BEN CHRISTENSEN, individually ) 

and in his capacity as Correction Super-) 

visor of the Utah State Prison; SHAUN ) 

DARBRO, individually and in his capacity) 

as Correctional Officer of the Utah ) 

State Prison, ) 

) 

Defendants-Appellees. ) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

No. 91-4044 

(D. C. No. 91-CV-66-J) 

(D. Utah) 

Before ANDERSON, TACHA, and BRORBY, Circuit Judges. 

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel 

* 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 estoppal. 10th Cir. R. 

36.3. 

Appellate Case: 91-4044 Document: 010110130224 Date Filed: 08/05/1991 Page: 1 
,. 

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 cause is therefore ordered 

submitted without oral argument. 

Mr. Haston, a state prisoner, filed a prose action against 

various Utah officials under 42 u.s.c. § 1983, claiming that he 

had been subjected to cruel and unusual punishment by virtue of 

his medical care. The district court, after referring the case to 

a magistrate judge, dismissed the action. Mr. Haston appeals pro 

se. 

A review of the complaint reveals that Mr. Haston presented 

the prison officials with a letter from a Ph.D., which stated he 

might have an "affective disorder" and recommended that Mr. Haston 

be evaluated. Accordingly, Mr. Haston saw the prison 

psychiatrist, who prescribed the antidepressant drug Prozac. Two 

weeks later, the psychiatrist increased the dosage. About a week 

thereafter, Mr. Haston began having adverse reactions to the drug. 

Mr. Haston then requested treatment and a physician's assistant 

informed him that he was suffering an overdose reaction to Prozac. 

Bed rest was ordered and the prescribing physician then informed 

him that Prozac did not cause his problems. Mr. Haston was then 

evaluated by the prison's psychological department and they 

concluded Mr. Haston 

Mr. Haston then filed 

punishment by virtue 

had no problems that warranted medication. 

this suit claiming cruel and unusual 

of deliberate indifference to his medical 

-2-

Appellate Case: 91-4044 Document: 010110130224 Date Filed: 08/05/1991 Page: 2 
,. 

needs. 

The matter was referred to a magistrate judge who concluded 

Mr. Haston had, at best, stated a medical malpractice claim and 

had failed to show any facts that would rise to the level of 

deliberate indifference and recommended dismissal under 28 u.s.c. 

§ 1915(d). Mr. Haston filed objections alleging the defendants' 

action constituted deliberate indifference. The district court 

adopted the magistrate judge's report and recommendation and 

dismissed the action. (R. Vol. I, Doc. 7.) 

On appeal Mr. Haston reiterates the facts and argues that 

prescribing an "un-needed and dangerous psychotropic medication" 

without first properly determining whether the medication was 

warranted amounts to deliberate indifference. 

Mr. Haston is mistaken in his perception of the law as 

applied to the facts of this case. In Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 

97, 106 (1976), the Supreme Court held that medical malpractice 

toward a state prisoner does not give rise to a§ 1983 cause of 

action. In the Court's words, "a complaint that a physician has 

been negligent in diagnosing or treating a medical condition does 

not state a valid claim of medical mistreatment II Mr. 

Haston's complaint fails to show deliberate indifference, which 

generally is understood to mean that the prison officials 

purposefully failed to address his medical problems. In this 

case, the prison officials did address Mr. Haston's medical 

-3-

Appellate Case: 91-4044 Document: 010110130224 Date Filed: 08/05/1991 Page: 3 
• problems in a reasonably prompt fashion. Section 1983 provides no 

relief under the facts of this case. 

Mr. Haston requests that we allow him to proceed with this 

appeal in forma pauperis. We allow him to do so even though this 

case comes perilously close to being frivolous. Certainly, the 

claims Mr. Haston raises involving the prison's non-medical 

personnel are without merit. We therefore AFFIRM the judgment of 

the district court. 

The mandate shall issue forthwith. 

Entered for the Court: 

WADE BRORBY 

United States Circuit Judge 

-4-

Appellate Case: 91-4044 Document: 010110130224 Date Filed: 08/05/1991 Page: 4