From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Morgan v. Bartruff

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Ciruit
Nov 29, 2013
545 F. App'x 592 (8th Cir. 2013)

Summary

holding Iowa inmate failed to state an equal protection claim for "lack of access to sex-offender treatment and current inability to be heard and considered for parole eligibility"

Summary of this case from Belk v. State

Opinion

No. 13-1828

11-29-2013

Mark D. Morgan Plaintiff - Appellant v. Jerry Bartruff; Gail Huckins; Kelli Collins; Kevin Weideman; Pamela Benson; Clarence Key; Elizabeth Robinson; Karen Muelhaupt; Lawrence James; Richard Boardwell; Nancy Boyd; Walter Reed, Jr.; Steven Young; Barbara Western; Daren Jacques; Doris Kelley; Jim Felker; W. Thomas Phillips; Robyn Mills; Arthur Neu; David Erickson; Michael Sadler; Charles Larson; John Chalstrom; Nancy Turner; Sheryl Griffith; Johnie Hammond; Michael Coleman, Rev.; John Baldwin; Fred Scaletta; Jerry Burt; Sheryl Lockwood; Daniel Craig; Greg Ort Defendants - Appellees


Appeal from United States District Court

for the Southern District of Iowa - Des Moines


[Unpublished]

Before MURPHY, SMITH, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM.

Mark Morgan appeals the district court's adverse judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action arising from his present lack of access to sex-offender treatment and current inability to be heard and considered for parole eligibility. Following careful de novo review, see Reynolds v. Dormire, 636 F.3d 976, 979 (8th Cir. 2011), we agree with the district court that Morgan failed to state an equal protection claim, see Patel v. United States Bureau of Prisons, 515 F.3d 807, 815 (8th Cir. 2008), or a due process claim, see Greenholtz v. Inmates of Neb. Penal & Corr. Complex, 442 U.S. 1, 7 (1979); Sandin v. Conner, 515 U.S. 472, 483-84 (1995); Strutton v. Meade, 668 F.3d 549, 557 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 133 S. Ct. 124 (2012); Callender v. Sioux City Residential Treatment Facility, 88 F.3d 666, 669-70 (8th Cir. 1996); Stewart v. Davies, 954 F.2d 515, 516 (8th Cir. 1992). We also agree that Morgan did not allege that any named defendant was responsible for his lack of access to his minor children.

The Honorable James E. Gritzner, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa.

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court, and we deny Morgan's motion for appointment of counsel. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.


Summaries of

Morgan v. Bartruff

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Ciruit
Nov 29, 2013
545 F. App'x 592 (8th Cir. 2013)

holding Iowa inmate failed to state an equal protection claim for "lack of access to sex-offender treatment and current inability to be heard and considered for parole eligibility"

Summary of this case from Belk v. State

deciding that Iowa inmate did not state a valid due process claim based on his inability to be heard and considered for parole eligibility

Summary of this case from Brumfield v. Barrett
Case details for

Morgan v. Bartruff

Case Details

Full title:Mark D. Morgan Plaintiff - Appellant v. Jerry Bartruff; Gail Huckins…

Court:United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Ciruit

Date published: Nov 29, 2013

Citations

545 F. App'x 592 (8th Cir. 2013)

Citing Cases

Brumfield v. Barrett

The denial of parole is insufficient to confer a liberty interest because the duration of plaintiff's…

Belk v. State

Conkleton v. Raemisch , 603 Fed.Appx. 713, 716 (10th Cir. 2015) ("Plaintiff cannot succeed on his due process…