Poareo v. Johnson, (10th Cir. 2002)
Linked as:
Text
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
TENTH CIRCUIT
ALBERT POAREO,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
No. 02-2136
v.
(D.C. No. CIV-02-141-BB/LCS)
GARY JOHNSON, Governor, State of
New Mexico; and ROBERT PERRY,
Secretary of Corrections,
(D. New Mexico)
Defendants - Appellees.
ORDER AND JUDGMENT
name="txt*">(*)
Before KELLY, McKAY, and
MURPHY, Circuit Judges.
After examining the briefs and the appellate record, this panel has
determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the
determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G).
The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.
This is a pro se state prisoner § 1983 civil rights appeal claiming that
certain New Mexico statutes are unconstitutional and that certain programs and
actions of the New Mexico Corrections Department constitute Eighth Amendment
violations. Mr. Poareo sought equitable relief and nominal damages. The district
court dismissed the complaint without prejudice for failure to exhaust
administrative remedies. Mr. Poareo appeals to this court.
We agree with the district court that Appellant "may not prosecute his
claims in this Court unless and until he exhausts administrative remedies." Order
at 2. After a thorough review of the brief and the record and for substantially the
same reasons set forth in the district court's well-reasoned April 22, 2002, Order,
we hold that no relief is available to Mr. Poareo pursuant to § 1983.
The decision of the district court is AFFIRMED. We remind
Appellant
that because his motion to proceed without prepayment of the appellate filing fee
was granted, he must continue making partial payments on court fees and costs
previously assessed until such have been paid in full.
Entered for the Court
Monroe G. McKay
Circuit Judge
FOOTNOTES
Click footnote number to return to corresponding location in the text.
*. This order and judgment is not binding
precedent, except under the
doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court
generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order
and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.
Sponsored links
