Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-04-01679/USCOURTS-ca8-04-01679-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Lori Carr
Appellee
Thomas Clements
Appellee
Francis
Appellee
Michael Goff
Appellant
Becky Holt
Appellee
Jean Ann Johnson
Appellee
Keeter
Appellee
Shanna Keeter
Appellee
Mike Kemna
Appellee
Larry Lakey
Appellee
Lori Lakey
Appellee
Steve Marley
Appellee
Terry Page
Appellee
William Wayne
Appellee
William Waynes
Appellee

Document Text:

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 04-1679

___________

Michael Goff, *

*

Appellant, *

*

v. * Appeal from the United States 

* District Court for the Western

Thomas Clements, Mike Kemna, * District of Missouri.

Terry Page, William Waynes, *

Jean Ann Johnson, Francis Keeter, * [UNPUBLISHED]

Larry Lakey, Lori Carr, *

Steve Marley, Becky Holt, *

William Wayne, Lori Lakey, *

Shanna Keeter, *

*

Appellees. *

___________

Submitted: May 9, 2005

Filed: May 18, 2005 

___________

Before LOKEN, Chief Judge, BEAM, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Michael Goff appeals the district court's dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983

action challenging the conditions of his confinement. Goff was an inmate in

protective custody at the Crossroads Correctional Center, a level 5 security facility.

Goff brought this section 1983 action as a class action, alleging that he and all the

Appellate Case: 04-1679 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/18/2005 Entry ID: 1904013
-2-

other protective custody inmates had minimal access to outside air, the recreational

facilities, and the law library, as compared to inmates not only in the general

population, but even inmates who were being punished in administrative segregation.

The district court denied class status, converted the state's motion to dismiss to a

motion for summary judgment, and dismissed the petition on the merits.

In August 2004, after the district court's decision and while this appeal was

pending, Goff was transferred from Crossroads to the Western Missouri Correctional

Center, a level 3 security facility. Goff is no longer subject to the conditions he

complains about in his complaint. Because he sought only injunctive relief, his case

is therefore moot. Martin v. Sargent, 780 F.2d 1334, 1337 (8th Cir. 1985) (holding

that when prisoner was moved from offending unit to another location, his claim for

injunctive relief to improve prison conditions was moot because he was no longer

subject to those conditions). Nor does Goff argue that the injunctive relief he seeks

could address future wrongs that Goff is likely to suffer. Randolph v. Rodgers, 170

F.3d 850, 856-57 (8th Cir. 1999). We decline to make that argument for him.

Mahaney v. Warren County, 206 F.3d 770, 771 n.2 (8th Cir. 2000). 

We dismiss the appeal as moot.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 04-1679 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/18/2005 Entry ID: 1904013