No. 19-8930

Reginald L. Dunahue v. Wendy Kelley, Director, Arkansas Department of Correction, et al.

Lower Court: Eighth Circuit
Docketed: 2020-07-08
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedRelisted (2)IFP
Tags: 8th-amendment civil-rights constitutional-law criminal-procedure due-process habeas-corpus judicial-review prison-conditions qualified-immunity standing
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity Punishment
Latest Conference: 2020-12-04 (distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (from Petition)

Th C Ab
Petitioner Appointment Of Caunsel?
n il Co
y iA gi
Wendy kelley Mashall Red Jy Andw
icials
he CAy
Cancurring withhe . istrict Court' misl?
d the . District Courndviola the .Conitutio
ing a
achd spondnt-fficialKathy baxter damin Craford
En lane, David Knott and dames Dycus?
Anh Cou Appa ny
ustice by Concurring w/ the dusting of my Claims?
committed by U.s. Dist. Court dudge -
Was a mis carriage of Jostice
when they granted respondents Qual5 and appellate Court Judges
ified Immunity?

isic Co cisin y y min apint
Int of Counsel ?
district Court's decision to dismiss Warden Jeremy Andrews, DirE that I accused Mr. Andrews, Mis. Kelley and Mr.Reed of Cons
itinal libiity for failure to Pratet m-Dunahu R also
my Complaint accuses them of failing to Supervise their officers
who include apelles axter&Crawford lane &knott; they knEW Easit Arkansas Regional Prisan's recreation yard operation a.-
nd its Cages Constituted a substantial risk of Serious harm to meDunahu, R. but Mrs klley, Mr Reed and Mr. Andrews inored and di
try to abate that substantial risk of serious harm to me which reswlted in me being taken to th Prison's recreation yard where appelle
Baxter minutes before had took an inmate with aknife
on his Person to, and I was stabbed with also, Mrs, kelley, Mr. Reed and me
Andrews
failedto Protect inmates fram violence at the hands of
ather inmates
Mes. kelley, Me. heed and Mr. Andrews Showed DelibErate indifference to the Serious and Excessive risks to the health and Safeky
Of inmates at East AR. Regional Prison
by
failling
Ao adequately
Supervise and krain the Prison's
Officers which includes appelles- Dycus, Knot, lane, Crawford and Baxter
in how
pi an codin
Ao develep andfollow effective internal review process for reporti
Poicy vations andso bing dicipne malfs
b0
T

Employecs
the our Appa Coring
istrict Court's decision to grant Summary Judment t dpBaxter
?
Did the Bthir, Court Of Appeals Err by Concurring with the
to grant qualifidimmunity to appedistrict Court's decision
11EEs
Dycus, kinott, lane, Crawford and Baxker
?
Did a ppellees
kelley,REed, Andrws, Dycus, Knott, Lans, Crawford and
baxter violate the Bth Amendment to the U.s. Constitution?

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the U.S. Supreme Court should review the discretion of the U.S. District Court and the U.S. Court of Appeals in dismissing the petitioner's claims against Arkansas prison officials

Docket Entries

2020-12-07
Rehearing DENIED.
2020-11-10
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/4/2020.
2020-10-21
Petition for Rehearing filed.
2020-10-05
Petition DENIED.
2020-08-13
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/29/2020.
2020-08-06
Waiver of right of respondent Wendy Kelley to respond filed.
2020-06-03
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due August 7, 2020)

Attorneys

Reginald L. Dunahue
Reginald L. Dunahue — Petitioner
Wendy Kelley
Michael Anthony CantrellOffice of the Arkansas Attorney General, Respondent