Opinion
21-3086
08-06-2021
MICAH J. YOAKUM, SR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. JEFF ZMUDA, KDOC Secretary of Corrections, in his official and individual capacities; MICHELLE SULLIVAN, KDOC Sentence Computation Unit Manager/Official, in her official and individual capacities; JULIE MANION, Unit Team Specialist for Records, El Dorado Correctional Facility, in her official and individual capacities, Defendants - Appellees.
D.C. No. 5:21-CV-03017-SAC, D. Kan.
Before HARTZ, KELLY, and McHUGH, Circuit Judges.
After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist in 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This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1.
Paul J. Kelly, Jr. Circuit Judge
Micah J. Yoakum, a state inmate appearing pro se, appeals from the district court's judgment dismissing his civil rights action, 42 U.S.C. § 1983, seeking a declaratory judgment, injunctive relief, and compensatory and punitive damages. Our jurisdiction arises under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and given our de novo review, we affirm because the complaint does not state a plausible claim for relief. See Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009).
Mr. Yoakum alleges that prison officials were responsible for falsifying documents (identifying him as a parole violator when he was not on parole and not releasing him on time) and his sentence was computed incorrectly. The district court explained to Mr. Yoakum that because he was challenging the computation of his sentence, he would have to proceed in a habeas corpus action, 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Yoakum v. Zmuda, No. 21-3017-SAC, 2021 WL 1043039 (D. Kan. Feb. 12, 2021). Mr. Yoakum responded that he did not intend to do so. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, the district court screened the complaint, denied injunctive relief and ordered Mr. Yoakum to show cause why the complaint should not be dismissed given that it sounded in habeas and any relief would imply the invalidity of his sentence. Yoakum v. Zmuda, No. 21-3017-SAC, 2021 WL 929785, at *4 (D. Kan. Mar. 11, 2021). Mr. Yoakum responded that his sentence was correct and the district court repeated its analysis and explained that Mr. Yoakum alleged no cognizable injury and could not recover given 42 U.S.C. §1997e(e). Yoakum v. Zmuda, No. 21-3017-SAC, 2021 WL 1990020 (D. Kan. May 5, 2021).
On appeal, Mr. Yoakum argues that his civil rights were compromised because the defendants falsified documents although he does not challenge the fact or duration of his confinement. He maintains that the district court misinterpreted his complaint. To the contrary, the district court exercised consummate patience and explained why he had no remedy.
AFFIRMED. We deny IFP status and remind Mr. Yoakum that he is responsible for full payment of the filing fee. This disposition constitutes a strike.