Darryl Leonard Scott v. PAUL PENZONE, Sheriff at Towers, County Jail;

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
DARRYL LEONARD SCOTT,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
PAUL PENZONE, Sheriff at Towers,
County Jail; et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
No. 21-15854
D.C. No. 2:20-cv-02115-DWL-JFM
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
Dominic Lanza, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted January 19, 2022**
Before: SILVERMAN, CLIFTON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.
Darryl Leonard Scott appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment
dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action challenging his conditions of confinement
during his detention at the Maricopa County Jail. We have jurisdiction under 28
U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Resnick
* 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).
FILED
JAN 26 2022
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 21-15854
v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir. 2000). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Scott’s action for failure to state a
claim. See Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 837 (1994) (elements of an Eighth
Amendment conditions-of-confinement claim); Gordon v. County of Orange, 888
F.3d 1118, 1125 (9th Cir. 2018) (elements of a due process conditions-of-
confinement claim); LeMaire v. Maass, 12 F.3d 1444, 1456 (9th Cir.1993) (“The
Eighth Amendment requires only that prisoners receive food that is adequate to
maintain health . . . .”).”
Scott’s motion for excerpts to be included (Docket Entry No. 8) is granted.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --