IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-11407
Summary Calendar
MARLON S. JOHNSON,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
C.L. HASH, Officer; HEWITT, Officer; JOHN DOE,
Officer, No. 1; JOHN DOE, Officer, No. 2,
Defendants-Appellees.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:00-CV-389-A
--------------------
July 09, 2001
Before DAVIS, JONES, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Marlon S. Johnson, Texas prisoner # 449868, appeals the
district court’s summary judgment in favor of the defendants on
his claims brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Johnson attempts to
raise numerous claims that were not properly presented in the
district court, including conspiracy, racial discrimination,
indictment invalidity, and respondeat superior. These constitute
factual allegations that were not presented to the district
court, and this court cannot review them on appeal. See
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.
No. 00-11407
-2-
Leverette v. Louisville Ladder Co., 183 F.3d 339, 342 (5th Cir.
1999), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 1138 (2000).
Johnson contends that the defendant officers did not have
probable cause to arrest him for the attempted burglary. If
probable cause exists for any of the charges for which an
individual is arrested, a claim of false arrest can be defeated.
Wells v. Bonner, 45 F.3d 90, 95 (5th Cir. 1995). Johnson has
failed to show that the defendant officers lacked probable cause
to arrest him for aggravated assault on a police officer, given
the fact that he was apprehended with a knife in his hand. See
TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. §§ 22.01(a)(2), 22.02(a)(2).
Johnson also asserts that the officers used excessive force
against him during his arrest. To set forth a Fourth Amendment
claim for excessive force during an arrest, Johnson must show an
injury resulting “from the use of force that was clearly
excessive to the need[,] and the excessiveness of which was . . .
objectively unreasonable.” Ikerd v. Blair, 101 F.3d 430, 433-34
(5th Cir. 1996)(footnote and citation omitted). Johnson does not
allege an injury arising from his being thrown against the trunk
of a police car. As for the hurt wrists, shoulder, and neck and
the head laceration which occurred during the arrest, Johnson has
failed to show that those injuries were excessive to the need or
unreasonable under the circumstances of an individual holding
something in his hand and resisting being placed in handcuffs.
The district court’s summary judgment is AFFIRMED.
Johnson also requests appointment of counsel on appeal. He
has failed to show that his case involves exceptional
No. 00-11407
-3-
circumstances requiring appointment. See Ulmer v. Chancellor,
691 F.2d 209, 212 (5th Cir. 1982). Consequently, his motion is
DENIED.
AFFIRMED; MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL DENIED.