No. 19-5560
Cecil McDonald Davis v. United States, et al.
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: 8th-amendment bivens bivens-action bivens-claim certificate-of-appealability civil-procedure civil-rights deliberate-indifference due-process eighth-amendment medical-claim
Latest Conference:
2019-10-11
Question Presented (from Petition)
1.) Whether the District Court in denying the Petitioner medical claim under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971) violated his Eighth Amendment as the result of deliberate indifference. Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 104, 97 S. Ct. 285, 50 L. Ed. 2d 257 (1976)
2.) Whether the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit erred in denying the Petitioner request that a certificate of appealability be issued?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the District Court in denying the Petitioner's medical claim under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971) violated his Eighth Amendment as the result of deliberate indifference
Docket Entries
2019-10-15
Petition DENIED.
2019-09-19
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/11/2019.
2019-08-23
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2019-07-29
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due September 11, 2019)
Attorneys
Cecil McDonald Davis
Cecil McDonald Davis — Petitioner
United States
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent