Opinion ID: 811139
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Officer Colon

Text: various unsworn prison records because that evidence could have been reduced to admissible evidence at trial. 6 Case: 10-15381 Date Filed: 11/01/2012 Page: 7 of 12 The record supports the district court’s conclusion that the alleged use of force by Colon was not carried out maliciously and sadistically to cause harm. Skrtich, 280 F.3d at 1300. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to Muhammad, Colon applied force to Muhammad because Muhammad declined to shave. However, Colon was authorized to use force to enforce the prison’s shaving policy. Therefore, although the parties disputed why Colon applied force, that dispute is not material, because it did not have the potential to change the outcome of the case. Zaben v. Air Products & Chemicals, 129 F.3d 1453, 1455 (11th Cir. 1997) (“A fact is material only when the dispute over it has the potential to change the outcome of the lawsuit under the governing law if found favorably to the nonmovant.”). Moreover, although Muhammad asserted Colon refused to provide him with cold water to rinse off the chemical agents, he also admitted in his deposition that he did not know if Colon actually had control over the water temperature. Colon himself testified the water temperature in the shower was regulated by the maintenance department. Furthermore, testimony from the prison doctor supported Colon’s testimony that he did not apply excessive force, as the doctor determined Muhammad suffered only from some initial pain and discomfort. See Wilkins, 130 S. Ct. at 1178-79. Accordingly, the district court did not err by 7 Case: 10-15381 Date Filed: 11/01/2012 Page: 8 of 12 granting summary judgment in favor of Colon.