Joseph Flying Horse v. James Hansen, No. 18-1118 (8th Cir. 2018)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Per Curiam - Before Shepherd, Kelly and Grasz, Circuit Judges] Prisoner case - Prisoner civil rights. Plaintiff's appeal from an order denying his motion for a preliminary injunction on his claim that he was detained after the expiration of his detainer was moot as his parole has been revoked. [ May 29, 2018
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 18-1118 ___________________________ Joseph R. Flying Horse lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant v. James Hansen, Parole Agent, Sued in his Official and Individual Capacities; Doug Clark, Supervising Parole Agent, Sued in his Official and Individual Capacities; Krista Bast, Case Manager, Sued in her Official and Individual Capacities; Seth Hughes, Unit Coordinator, Sued in his Official and Individual Capacities; Darin Young, Warden, of the South Dakota State Penitentiary, Sued in his Official and Individual Capacities; Denny Kaemingk, Secretary of Corrections, Sued in his Official and Individual Capacities; Miranda Ward, SDSP Case Manager, Sued in her Official and Individual Capacities; Riley DeGroot, SDSP Case Manager, Sued in his Official and Individual Capacities; Troy Ponto, SDSP Associate Warden, Sued in his Official and Individual Capacities; Darik Beiber, SDSP Unit Manager, Sued in his Official and Individual Capacities; Val McGovern, Board Staff, Sued in her Official and Individual Capacities lllllllllllllllllllllDefendants - Appellees Stacy Cole, Board Staff, Sued in her Official and Individual Capacities; Kayla Stucky, Board Staff, Sued in her Official and Individual Capacities; Ashley McDonald, DOC Attorney, Sued in her Official and Individual Capacities lllllllllllllllllllllDefendants Pennington County, Respondeat Superior, for Pennington County State's Attorney Office lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellee South Dakota Department of Corrections; South Dakota Board of Pardons and Paroles lllllllllllllllllllllDefendants ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the District of South Dakota - Sioux Falls ____________ Submitted: May 17, 2018 Filed: May 30, 2018 [Unpublished] ____________ Before SHEPHERD, KELLY, and GRASZ, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. In this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action, South Dakota inmate Joseph Flying Horse appeals the district court’s1 interlocutory order denying his motion for a preliminary injunction. After careful review of the record and the parties’ arguments on appeal, we conclude that this appeal is moot because the relief Flying Horse sought--an injunction addressing his detention after the expiration of his detainer, as well as issues related to his potential parole revocation--is now moot as his parole was revoked following a hearing. See Bierman v. Dayton, 817 F.3d 1070, 1072 (8th Cir. 2016) (dismissing for lack of jurisdiction where appeal of order denying preliminary injunction became moot because act sought to be enjoined had occurred). 1 The Honorable Karen E. Schreier, United States District Judge for the District of South Dakota. -2- Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal as moot and deny Flying Horse’s pending motion. ______________________________ -3-
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.
