Case Name: Sandy Rene CALLEGARI, Individually and As Surviving Heir at Law, and Next of Kin of Mr. Sandy Leroy Booker Jr. Deceased, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Tommy THOMAS, In His Official Capacity as Sheriff of Harris County, Texas; Harris County Texas, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-07-19
Citations: 234 F. App'x 327
Docket Number: No. 07-20010
Parties: Sandy Rene CALLEGARI, Individually and As Surviving Heir at Law, and Next of Kin of Mr. Sandy Leroy Booker Jr. Deceased, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Tommy THOMAS, In His Official Capacity as Sheriff of Harris County, Texas; Harris County Texas, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 234
Pages: 327–327

Head Matter:
Sandy Rene CALLEGARI, Individually and As Surviving Heir at Law, and Next of Kin of Mr. Sandy Leroy Booker Jr. Deceased, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Tommy THOMAS, In His Official Capacity as Sheriff of Harris County, Texas; Harris County Texas, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 07-20010
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
July 19, 2007.
Eric Joseph Davis, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
Fred A. Keys, Jr., County Attorney’s Office, Houston, TX, for Defendants-Ap-pellees.
Before JONES, Chief Judge, and HIGGINBOTHAM and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
The court has carefully reviewed this § 1983 appeal in light of the briefs and pertinent parts of the record. Having done so, we find no reversible error of law or fact. The district court correctly concluded that the plaintiff failed to allege the existence of an official policy or custom attributable to Harris County. See Cox v. City of Dallas, 430 F.3d 734, 748-49 (5th Cir.2005). The court also acted within its discretion by denying leave to amend the complaint. See Goldstein v. MCI World-Com, 340 F.3d 238, 254-55 (5th Cir.2003). We therefore AFFIRM for essentially the reasons stated by the trial court.
AFFIRMED.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.