Opinion
No. 109,040.
2013-08-30
Dustin J. MERRYFIELD, Appellant, v. Shawn SULLIVAN, Secretary of Kansas Department for Aging and Disability Services, Appellee.
Appeal from Pawnee District Court; Bruce T. Gatterman, Judge. Dustin J. Merryfield, appellant pro se. Kimberly M.J. Lynch, senior litigation counsel, of Kansas Department for Aging and Disability Services, for appellee.
Appeal from Pawnee District Court; Bruce T. Gatterman, Judge.
Dustin J. Merryfield, appellant pro se. Kimberly M.J. Lynch, senior litigation counsel, of Kansas Department for Aging and Disability Services, for appellee.
Before MALONE, P.J., POWELL and SCHROEDER, JJ.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
PER CURIAM.
Dustin Merryfield, who has filed over 40 appeals to this court, appeals the dismissal of his petition for declaratory and injunctive relief. Merryfield is committed for treatment at Larned State Hospital under the custody of the Kansas Department for Aging and Disability Services (KDADS) pursuant to K.S.A. 59–29a01 et seq. , the Kansas Sexually Violent Predator Act. The gravamen of his complaint is that he was wrongly denied the ability to buy his own personal printer. Merryfield contends that the court erred by dismissing his petition for the following reasons: (1) a private right of action existed pursuant to K.S.A.2012 Supp. 59–29a22; (2) discovery remained unanswered; and (3) an actual controversy existed and he suffered an injury in fact. Merryfield also contends the court erred by denying his oral request to amend his petition for declaratory and injunctive relief to a habeas petition.
We have independently reviewed the matter and summarily affirm the district court's well-reasoned opinion because we agree that this appeal is totally without merit. K.S.A.2012 Supp. 59–29a22 does not create a private cause of action, the discovery issue is moot, Merryfield lacks standing because he has not sufficiently pled facts demonstrating that there exists an actual case or controversy, and the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Merryfield's motion to convert his claim into a writ of habeas corpus. Thus, we affirm the district court's granting KDADS' motion to dismiss pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 7.042(b)(2), (5), and (6) (2012 Kan. Ct. R. Annot. 63).
Affirmed under Rule 7.042(b)(2), (5), and (6).