Opinion ID: 566782
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: The Eighth Amendment and Medical Treatment

Text: 19 Fernandez contends that the failures of the Parole Commission, the Bureau and the Pardon Attorney to grant relief are tantamount to a violation of the eighth amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. Fernandez's various requests for relief have been attempts to obtain the medical care essential to his long-term survival which he cannot obtain through the Bureau. Fernandez cannot state an actionable eighth amendment claim, assuming, arguendo, that a basis for jurisdiction exists, unless he can demonstrate that the treatment he has received falls below minimal civilized levels or is the result of a prison official's culpable state of mind. See Wilson v. Seiter, --- U.S. ----, 111 S.Ct. 2321, 115 L.Ed.2d 271 (1991). 20 An inmate's entitlement to medical treatment reasonably commensurate with modern medical science and of a quality acceptable within prudent professional standards is undisputed. United States v. DeCologero, 821 F.2d 39, 43 (1st Cir.1987). To establish a valid eighth amendment claim, a prisoner must allege acts or omissions sufficiently harmful to evidence [the] deliberate indifference [of prison officials] to [his] serious medical needs. Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 106, 97 S.Ct. 285, 292, 50 L.Ed.2d 251 (1976). Fernandez has not met this standard. 21 The record demonstrates that Fernandez's medical condition has not been treated with deliberate indifference. Fernandez has been incarcerated at FMC-Rochester since November 1988. During his time he has received treatment at the world-renowned Mayo Clinic and has undergone several specialized procedures, including angioplasty. Fernandez's doctor has written letters to various prison authorities concerning the life-threatening nature of Fernandez's condition, resulting in Fernandez's freedom from prison work duties. Fernandez's condition continues to be monitored at FMC-Rochester and is maintained by medication. In addition, two wardens have advised the Parole Commission of Fernandez's medical condition and requested consideration of an early parole date. 22 Furthermore, [t]he appropriate Eleventh Circuit relief from prison conditions that violate the Eighth Amendment ... is to require the discontinuance of any improper practices, or to require correction of any condition causing cruel and unusual punishment. Gomez v. United States, 899 F.2d 1124, 1126 (11th Cir.1990). Release from confinement is not a possible remedy. The only remedy available to Fernandez would be an injunction from the Minnesota district court, the district in which he is incarcerated. See Gomez, 899 F.2d at 1127; 28 U.S.C.A. § 1391(e) (Supp.1991).