Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Bill E. Tucker, Jr. v. Steven J. Davies, Raymond Roberts, R.L. Smith, Chief Clerk, 948 F.2d 1295, 10th Cir. (1991)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    4 views2 pages
    This document is a court order from the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit regarding a case brought by a Kansas state prison inmate, Bill E. Tucker, Jr., under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Kansas prison officials. The district court had dismissed Tucker's complaint as frivolous and denied him leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. The Tenth Circuit agrees with the district court's conclusions that the prison officials' confiscation of money sent to Tucker to pay fines did not violate Tucker's due process rights under Kansas regulations and that Tucker failed to state any other claims meriting relief. Accordingly, the Tenth Circuit dismisses Tucker's appeal as frivolous.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1991-11-18 Precedential Status: Precedential Citations: 948 F.2d 1295 Docket: 91-3103

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document is a court order from the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit regarding a case brought by a Kansas state prison inmate, Bill E. Tucker, Jr., under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Kansas prison officials. The district court had dismissed Tucker's complaint as frivolous and denied him leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. The Tenth Circuit agrees with the district court's conclusions that the prison officials' confiscation of money sent to Tucker to pay fines did not violate Tucker's due process rights under Kansas regulations and that Tucker failed to state any other claims meriting relief. Accordingly, the Tenth Circuit dismisses Tucker's appeal as frivolous.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    4 views2 pages

    Bill E. Tucker, Jr. v. Steven J. Davies, Raymond Roberts, R.L. Smith, Chief Clerk, 948 F.2d 1295, 10th Cir. (1991)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is a court order from the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit regarding a case brought by a Kansas state prison inmate, Bill E. Tucker, Jr., under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Kansas prison officials. The district court had dismissed Tucker's complaint as frivolous and denied him leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. The Tenth Circuit agrees with the district court's conclusions that the prison officials' confiscation of money sent to Tucker to pay fines did not violate Tucker's due process rights under Kansas regulations and that Tucker failed to state any other claims meriting relief. Accordingly, the Tenth Circuit dismisses Tucker's appeal as frivolous.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    948 F.

    2d 1295
    NOTICE: Although citation of unpublished opinions remains unfavored,
    unpublished opinions may now be cited if the opinion has persuasive value on a
    material issue, and a copy is attached to the citing document or, if cited in oral
    argument, copies are furnished to the Court and all parties. See General Order of
    November 29, 1993, suspending 10th Cir. Rule 36.3 until December 31, 1995, or
    further order.

    Bill E. TUCKER, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant,


    v.
    Steven J. DAVIES, Raymond Roberts, R.L. Smith, Chief Clerk,
    Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 91-3103.

    United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit.


    Nov. 18, 1991.

    Before LOGAN, JOHN P. MOORE and BALDOCK, Circuit Judges. *


    ORDER AND JUDGMENT**
    BALDOCK, Circuit Judge.

    Plaintiff-appellant Bill E. Tucker, Jr., a Kansas state prison inmate, brought this
    pro se 42 U.S.C. 1983 action against Kansas prison officials. He appeals from
    the district court's dismissal of his complaint as frivolous pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
    1915(d), and denial of leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. See
    Tucker v. Davies, No. 91-3035-S, unpub. order (D.Kan. Jan. 31, 1991) (order
    dismissing appeal); id., unpub. order (Mar. 20, 1991) (order denying motion to
    reconsider and leave to proceed in forma pauperis).

    Plaintiff alleged that the prison officials violated his due process rights by
    improperly confiscating money sent to him by his relatives and using the
    money to pay down fines accruing from prison disciplinary proceedings against
    defendant. We agree with the district court's conclusion that the prison officials'
    alleged actions were in accordance with the Kansas regulatory structure
    governing prison discipline and infringed no federally protected right. See

    Kan.Admin.Reg. 44-12-1301 to 1307. Also, we agree that plaintiff has not


    stated any other claims that would merit relief. Accordingly, we dismiss the
    appeal as frivolous pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915(d). See Hall v. Bellmon, 935
    F.2d 1106, 1108-09 (10th Cir.1991).

    After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined
    unanimously that oral argument would not assist the determination of this
    appeal. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a); 10th Cir.R. 34.1.9. The case therefore is
    ordered submitted without oral argument

    **

    This order and judgment has no precedential value and shall not be cited, or
    used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, except for purposes of establishing
    the doctrines of the law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. 10th
    Cir.R. 36.3

    You might also like