John Williams v. MO Jackson County
John Williams v. MO Jackson County
Opinion
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________
No. 17-1742 ___________________________
John L. Williams
lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant
Edward H. Pennington, Jr.; Anthony L. Nevels
lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiffs
v.
Jackie Robinson, JCDC Manager; Ken Conlee, JCDC Director; Gary Morrow, JCDC Mailroom Supervisor; Baldree, Lieutenant; Bowden, JCDC Mailroom Employee
lllllllllllllllllllllDefendants
MO Jackson County
lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellee
Paul Smith, Sergeant; County Executive Mike Sanders, Jackson County Executive
lllllllllllllllllllllDefendants ____________
Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City ____________
Submitted: April 12, 2019 Filed: May 14, 2019 [Unpublished] ____________ Before SHEPHERD, KELLY, and GRASZ, Circuit Judges. ____________
PER CURIAM.
John Williams, an inmate formerly confined in the Jackson County Detention Center in Kansas City, Missouri, appeals the adverse judgment entered by the district court1 following a jury trial in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action challenging the prison’s mail policy. Having carefully reviewed the parties’ arguments on appeal, we find no basis for reversal. We conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion by submitting the issues to the jury, see PFS Distrib. Co. v. Raduechel, 574 F.3d 580, 596 (8th Cir. 2009) (jury instructions are reviewed for abuse of discretion); Henderson v. Terhune, 379 F.3d 709, 712 (9th Cir. 2004) (whether regulation impermissibly restricts First Amendment rights under Turner v. Safley, 482 U.S. 78 (1987) is mixed question of law and fact; legitimacy of asserted penological interest is a finding of fact); or by admitting evidence of Williams’s prior convictions, see United States v. Has No Horse, 11 F.3d 104, 106 (8th Cir. 1993) (admissibility of evidence is reviewed for abuse of discretion). We further conclude that Williams failed to preserve his sufficiency-of-the-evidence argument at trial, see Unitherm Food Sys. v. Swift-Eckrich, Inc., 546 U.S. 394, 400-01 (2006) (in absence of post-verdict motion under Fed. R. Civ. P. 50(b), appellate court lacks power to direct district court to enter judgment contrary to that permitted to stand); and we reject his argument that Jackson County presented inconsistent arguments about its mail policy. Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed, see 8th Cir. R. 47B, and the pending motion is denied. ______________________________
1 The Honorable Brian C. Wimes, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri.
-2-
Reference
- Status
- Unpublished