AMADEO SANCHEZ V. STATE OF NEVADA, No. 12-17194 (9th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUL 07 2014 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT AMADEO SANCHEZ, No. 12-17194 Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 3:11-cv-00273-LRHWGC v. STATE OF NEVADA; NEVADA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, MEMORANDUM* Defendants, and MICHAEL B. KOEHN; et al., Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Nevada Larry R. Hicks, District Judge, Presiding Submitted June 25, 2014** Before: HAWKINS, TALLMAN, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges. * 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). Nevada state prisoner Amadeo Sanchez appeals pro se from the district court s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging deliberate indifference to his serious 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. 2004), and we affirm. The district court properly granted summary judgment because Sanchez failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether defendants knew that Sanchez faced a substantial risk of serious harm to his health arising from his Hepatitis C condition, and consciously disregarded such a risk. See Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 835, 842 (1994) (a prison official acts with deliberate indifference only if he knows that inmates face a substantial risk of serious harm and disregards that risk by failing to take reasonable measures to abate it ); Toguchi, 391 F.3d at 1058 (difference of opinion between a prisoner and medical authorities regarding the course of treatment does not constitute deliberate indifference; rather, the prisoner must establish that the chosen course of treatment was medically unacceptable under the circumstances (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)). Sanchez s contentions regarding the district court s alleged failure to review his evidence and rely only on defendants fabricated evidence, and defendants 2 12-17194 allegedly improper opposition to his motion to extend his prison copy work account, are unpersuasive. AFFIRMED. 3 12-17194
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.
