U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, 2022

Raspberry v. Lofton

Raspberry v. Lofton
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Decided June 2, 2022

Raspberry v. Lofton

Opinion

Case: 21-50449 Document: 00516340842 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/02/2022

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED No. 21-50449 June 2, 2022 Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Randy Lynn Raspberry, Plaintiff—Appellant, versus Warden Cynthia Lofton; Kristen A. Hurley; Nurse Teri Smith; Douglas E. Greene; Valencia Pollard-Fortson; Randall Meyer, Defendants—Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas No. 6:20-CV-1146

Before Smith, Stewart, and Graves, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:* While a state inmate, Randy Raspberry sued prison officials under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and under the ADA, alleging deliberate indifference to seri-

* Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circum- stances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.

Case: 21-50449 Document: 00516340842 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/02/2022

No. 21-50449

ous medical needs because he was denied dentures. In a comprehensive Order dated April 27, 2021, the district court carefully explained why the complaint must be dismissed for failure to state a claim per 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e).

As the court reasoned, “the law does not require inmates receive the best medical care. Plaintiff does not claim he has been refused an evaluation to determine whether he has a medical need for dentures and does not argue that any medical care provider has determined dentures were medically nec- essary. Instead, Plaintiff admits that an evaluation was conducted and it was determined that dentures were not medically necessary.” Further, “At best, Plaintiff’s claims against Defendants establish a disagreement with Plaintiff’s medical treatment, negligence, or medical malpractice―none of which amount to a constitutional violation.”

The judgment of dismissal is AFFIRMED, essentially for the rea- sons submitted by the district court. Raspberry’s request for appointment of counsel is DENIED.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.