Andrews v. Herrera
Andrews v. Herrera
Opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-40210 Conference Calendar
LARRY DONNELL ANDREWS,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
MAXIMILLIANO HERRERA; KEVIN WESEMAN; PRASIFIKA; SIMPON, WARDEN; MORRIS, MAJOR,
Defendants-Appellees.
-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. C-99-CV-344 -------------------- October 18, 2000 Before SMITH, BARKSDALE, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Larry Donnell Andrews, Texas state prisoner # 622716,
appeals the dismissal of his civil rights claims as frivolous
under
28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). Andrews has abandoned the
issue of the dismissal of his claims against the defendants in
their official capacities as barred by the Eleventh Amendment by
failing to brief that issue on appeal. See Yohey v. Collins,
985 F.2d 222, 224-25(5th Cir. 1993).
A dismissal of a complaint as frivolous under
§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) is reviewed for an abuse of discretion. See
Ruiz v. United States,
160 F.3d 273, 275(5th Cir. 1998).
* 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. No. 00-40210 -2-
Unsuccessful medical treatment, negligence, or medical
malpractice do not constitute deliberate indifference. Varnado
v. Lynaugh,
920 F.2d 320, 321(5th Cir. 1991). Andrews’
“[d]isagreement with [his] medical treatment does not state a
claim for Eighth Amendment indifference to medical needs.”
Norton v. Dimazana,
122 F.3d 286, 292(5th Cir. 1997).
The district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing
Andrews’ claims of deliberate indifference to serious medical
needs as frivolous.
AFFIRMED.
Reference
- Status
- Unpublished