Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-87-02026/USCOURTS-ca10-87-02026-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Gary D. Maynard
Appellee
Larry R. Meachum
Appellee
J. Mike Pruitt
Appellee
James M. Williams
Appellant

Document Text:

F-I LED 

Unit.erl States Court of Appeals 

•renth Circuit 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT MAR O 31989 

ROBERT L. HOECKER 

Clerk JAMES M. WILLIAMS, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v. 

GARY D. MAYNARD; LARRY R. MEACHUM; 

J. MIKE PRUITT, 

Defendants-Appellees. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

No. 87-2026 

(D.C. No. 86-564-C) 

(E.D. Okla.) 

Before ANDERSON and TACHA, Circuit Judges, and ROGERS, District 

Judge.** 

**The Honorable Richard D. Rogers, United States District Judge 

for the District of Kansas, sitting by designation. 

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. 

submitted without oral argument. 

The cause is therefore ordered 

*This order and 

be cited, or 

for purposes of 

res judicata, 

iudgment has no precedential value and shall not 

used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, except 

establishing the doctrines of the law of the case, 

or collateral estoppel. 10th Cir. R. 36.3. 

Appellate Case: 87-2026 Document: 010110023909 Date Filed: 03/03/1989 Page: 1 
This is an appeal from an order of the district court 

dismissing ·plaintiff's action as frivolous. 

Plaintiff commenced this action in district court pursuant to 

42 U.S.C. § 1983. In his complaint, plaintiff alleged that his 

eighth and fourteenth amendment rights were violated by 

defendants' actions and policy of requiring plaintiff and all 

other inmates in F cell house, 3 run, Protective Measures Unit of 

the Oklahoma State Penitentiary to wear handcuffs outside their 

prison cells. Plaintiff sought injunctive relief ordering 

defendants to cease such practice and to abolish the policy 

establishing this practice. After examining the Martinez report, 

Martinez v. Aaron, 570 F.2d 317 (10th Cir. 1978), the district 

court dismissed the action. 

In their brief on appeal, defendants state that plaintiff is 

no longer housed in the Oklahoma State Penitentiary. Although the 

allegedly unconstitutional actions by defendants in the particular 

unit of the Oklahoma State Penitentiary may continue, plaintiff's 

request for injunctive relief no longer raises a case or 

controversy. See City of Los Angeles v. Lyons, 461 U.S. 95 

(1983). 

The district court's order of June 24, 1987, is VACATED as 

moot, and this appeal is DISMISSED. See Great W. Sugar Co. v. 

Nelson, 442 U.S. 92 (1979); United States v. Munsingwear, Inc., 

2 

Appellate Case: 87-2026 Document: 010110023909 Date Filed: 03/03/1989 Page: 2 
• ' ~ 340 U.S. 36 (1950): Baker v. Bray, 701 F.2d 119, 122 (10th Cir. 

1983). 

The mandate shall issue forthwith. 

ENTERED FOR THE COURT 

PER CURIAM 

3 

Appellate Case: 87-2026 Document: 010110023909 Date Filed: 03/03/1989 Page: 3