VICTOR QUINTANA V. ERIC ESPINOSA, No. 13-16640 (9th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
FILED MAY 29 2014 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT VICTOR JOSE QUINTANA, Plaintiff - Appellant, No. 13-16640 D.C. No. 2:09-cv-03221-KJMCKD v. MEMORANDUM* ERIC ESPINOSA, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California Kimberly J. Mueller, District Judge, Presiding Submitted May 13, 2014** Before: CLIFTON, BEA, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges. Victor Jose Quintana, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging deliberate indifference to his medical needs. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Toguchi v. Chung, 391 F.3d 1051, 1056 (9th Cir. * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 2004), and we affirm. The district court properly granted summary judgment because Quintana failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether Espinosa was deliberately indifferent to his medical needs. See Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 837 (1994) (a prison official is deliberately indifferent only if he or she knows of and disregards an excessive risk to inmate health or safety ); Toguchi, 391 F.3d at 1060 ( Deliberate indifference is a high legal standard. A showing of . . . negligence is insufficient to establish a constitutional deprivation under the Eighth Amendment. ). AFFIRMED. 2 13-16640
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
