Ricky L. Maddix v. Steven Crawford, 216 F. App'x 605

Before WOLLMAN, MURPHY, and BYE, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Missouri inmate Ricky L. Maddix appeals the district court’s ^[1] dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. The district court dismissed the suit because, among other reasons, it agreed with defendants’ contentions that Maddix failed to exhaust the myriad claims raised in his complaint. Upon de novo review, see Nerness v. Johnson, 401 F.3d 874, 876 (8th Cir. 2005) (per curiam) (this court reviews de novo application of Prison Litigation Reform Act, and for clear error district court’s findings of fact), we agree with the district court that Maddix failed to exhaust administratively any of the claims he raised in the instant lawsuit before he filed his complaint, see Johnson v. Jones, 340 F.3d 624, 627 (8th Cir. 2003) (inmate must exhaust before filing suit, or dismissal is mandatory). Although Maddix contends that defendants thwarted his attempts to exhaust these claims, the record does not support his contention. See Sergent v. Norris, 330 F.3d 1084, 1085-86 (8th Cir. 2003) (per curiam) (finding no evidence in record that inmate was prevented from effectively utilizing grievance procedures).

Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. However, we modify the dismissal to clarify that it is without prejudice. See Calico Trailer Mfg. Co. v. Ins. Co. of N. Am., 155 F.3d 976, 978 (8th Cir. 1998).

Notes

[1] The Honorable Donald J. Stohr, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri. -2-

Case Details

Case Name: Ricky L. Maddix v. Steven Crawford

Court Name: Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

Date Published: Feb 14, 2007

Citations: 216 F. App'x 605; 05-4119

Docket Number: 05-4119

Court Abbreviation: 8th Cir.