STEPHEN SWARTZ V. JOSEPH GALLEGOS, No. 15-15876 (9th Cir. 2016)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT NOV 23 2016 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS STEPHEN SWARTZ, No. 15-15876 Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 4:11-cv-00302-FRZ v. MEMORANDUM* JOSEPH GALLEGOS, Defendant-Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona Frank R. Zapata, District Judge, Presiding Submitted November 16, 2016** Before: LEAVY, BERZON, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges. Arizona state prisoner Stephen Swartz appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment following a bench trial in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging excessive force while he was a pretrial detainee. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We affirm. * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). We are unable to consider Swartz’s contentions that the district court erred by entering judgment for Gallegos because Swartz failed to provide any portion of the trial transcript. See Fed. R. App. P. 10(b)(2) (“If the appellant intends to urge on appeal that a finding or conclusion is unsupported by the evidence or is contrary to the evidence, the appellant must include in the record a transcript of all evidence relevant to that finding or conclusion.”); Syncom Capital Corp. v. Wade, 924 F.2d 167, 168 (9th Cir. 1991) (dismissing appeal filed by pro se appellant for failure to comply with Fed. R. App. P. 10(b)(2)). AFFIRMED. 2 15-15876

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.