## F I L E D United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit 

### DEC 8 1997 

### PATRICK FISHER Clerk 

### UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

TENTH CIRCUIT

DARREN EUGENE PERKINS, Plaintiff-Appellant,

v. KANSAS DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, DAVE SUTTLE, Unit Manager; ROBERT KECKLER, Unit Manager; MICHAEL A. NELSON, Warden; WILLIAM L. CUMMINGS, Secretary of Corrections, Defendants-Appellees.

--------------------------------------------- DARREN EUGENE PERKINS, Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.SHERRY DETTMANNROUDYBUSH, Medical Contract Management Consultant; (NFN) SCRIVNER, Director of Nursing, Defendant-Appellees. No. 97-3175 (D.C. No. 95-CV-3250) (Kansas)

No. 97-3154 (D.C. No. 97-3170-GTV) (Kansas)* This order and judgment is not binding precedent, e xcept under the

doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or coll ateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the citation of orders and judg ments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and condi tions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3. -2- 

### ORDER AND JUDGMENT *

Before SEYMOUR , Chief Judge, PORFILIO and MURPHY , Circuit Judges. After examining the briefs and appellate record, th is panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materiallyassist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The c ause is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. Darren Eugene Perkins, a pro se state prisoner, bro ught these actions under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 asserting constitutional violation s arising from his confinement in disciplinary segregation. In appeal 97-3175, Mr . Perkins asserts that his placement in a small cell without electrical outlet s, table, chair, or shelving for over seven months for twenty-three hours a day viol ated the Kansas Advisory Jail Standards, as well as double jeopardy, equal protec tion, and the prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. After obtain ing a Martinez report, the district court ruled that Mr. Perkins had failed to demonstrate a violation of his constitutional rights and granted defendants’ motio n for summary judgment.-3-

We have carefully reviewed the lower court’s thorou gh and well-reasoned memorandum, and we AFFIRM substantially on the basis of the analysis and authorities set out therein. In related appeal 97-3154, Mr. Perkins asserts thathis constitutional right to privacy was violated when defendant Sherry Dettm an-Roudybush revealed facts concerning his medical condition to two other priso n officials. Mr. Perkins had written to the Secretary of Corrections and to the prison ombudsman to complain that his placement in the cell described above had aggravated his medical problems. He asserts that this letter was given to Ms. Dettman-Roudybush, a prison nurse who was the Medical Contract Management Consultant, and that she in turn discussed the letter with the prison wardenand the prison Secretary of Programs and Staff Development. The district court dismissed the action as frivolou s, pointing out that under an applicable prison regulation, information contai ned in a prisoner’s medical reports can be released to the warden and to the wa rden’s designees without written authorization under the circumstances here. We have carefully reviewed the district court’s ruling and we find no reversib le error. Accordingly, the dismissal is AFFIRMED. ENTERED FOR THE COURT Stephanie K. Seymour Chief Judge