FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION OCT 25 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
DERRICK LEE BILLUPS, No. 12-17016
Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 1:06-cv-01014-LJO
v.
MEMORANDUM*
LOMELI,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
Lawrence J. O’Neill, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted October 15, 2013**
Before: FISHER, GOULD, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
California state prisoner Derrick Lee Billups appeals pro se from the district
court’s judgment following a jury trial in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that
defendant violated his Eighth Amendment rights. We have jurisdiction under 28
U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion evidentiary rulings and will
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
reverse only if an erroneous ruling was prejudicial. Allstate Ins. Co. v. Herron,
634 F.3d 1101, 1110 (9th Cir. 2011). We affirm.
Billups’s contention that his trial exhibits were improperly excluded by the
district court is unavailing as Billups has not shown that the exclusions “more
probably than not” caused his trial to result in a tainted verdict. McEuin v. Crown
Equip. Corp., 328 F.3d 1028, 1032 (9th Cir. 2003).
Billups’s contention that the district court did not allow him to subpoena
witnesses is unsupported by the record.
AFFIRMED.
2 12-17016