Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-13-51134/USCOURTS-ca5-13-51134-0/pdf.json

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

---

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-51134

Summary Calendar

PATRICK BERNARD SMITH,

Plaintiff-Appellant

v.

CORRECTIONAL OFFICER SEAN MURRAY; HOWARD K. BENNETT, Physician 

Assistant Certified; MARK MINSHEW; OFFICER SWOOPS; LIEUTENANT 

PRESTON; SERGEANT BARROUGH; ASSISTANT WARDEN K. DEAN; TERI 

SMITH,

Defendants-Appellees

Appeals from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 6:10-CV-163

Before KING, JOLLY, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Patrick Bernard Smith filed a civil rights action alleging numerous 

constitutional violations arising from prison discipline and medical care. All 

of the claims have been dismissed on summary judgment, but we granted 

Smith leave to appeal in forma pauperis (IFP) whether the district court erred 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

March 18, 2015

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 

Case: 13-51134 Document: 00512973020 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/18/2015
No. 13-51134

by granting summary judgment dismissing an excessive-force claim against 

defendant Columbus Swopes arising on March 20, 2009, and an excessive-force 

claim against defendants Sean Murray and Mark Minshew arising on April 20, 

2009. Smith v. Murray, No. 13-51134 (5th Cir. May 6, 2014) (unpublished 

order). IFP was denied as to all other claims. Id.

Smith has abandoned the essential issues for appeal by failing to brief 

them. See Audler v. CBC Innovis Inc., 519 F.3d 239, 255 (5th Cir. 2008); Yohey 

v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 224-25 (5th Cir. 1993). At best, his few bare assertions 

of excessive force, unsupported by any competent summary judgment evidence,

do not show any genuine issue for trial. See Duffie v. United States, 600 F.3d 

362, 371 (5th Cir. 2010); Hathaway v. Bazany, 507 F.3d 312, 319 (5th Cir. 

2007). The district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED, and all of Smith’s claims 

against all defendants in this action are now dismissed.

2

Case: 13-51134 Document: 00512973020 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/18/2015