Santos v. White ( 2004 )


Menu:
  •                                                        United States Court of Appeals
    Fifth Circuit
    F I L E D
    IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS          April 28, 2004
    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
    Charles R. Fulbruge III
    Clerk
    No. 03-41517
    Summary Calendar
    JAMES RICHARD SANTOS,
    Plaintiff-Appellant,
    versus
    MIKE WHITE, Sheriff; RALPH OSBORNE, Jail Administrator,
    Defendants-Appellees.
    --------------------
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Eastern District of Texas
    USDC No. 1:00-CV-38
    --------------------
    Before SMITH, DeMOSS, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:*
    James Richard Santos, Texas prisoner #923141, appeals the
    district court’s dismissal without prejudice of his 
    42 U.S.C. § 1983
     civil rights complaint for failure to exhaust
    administrative remedies.    “No action shall be brought with
    respect to prison conditions under section 1983 . . . by a
    prisoner confined in any jail, prison, or other correctional
    facility until such administrative remedies as are available are
    *
    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    that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 03-41517
    -2-
    exhausted.”   42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a).    This court reviews de novo
    the dismissal of an inmate’s 
    42 U.S.C. § 1983
     suit for failure to
    exhaust administrative remedies.      Richardson v. Spurlock, 
    260 F.3d 495
    , 499 (5th Cir. 2001).
    Santos admits that he “did nothing as far as a[n] appeal”
    before he filed the instant complaint.     Santos alleges that he
    could not exhaust his administrative remedies because he feared
    for his life.   Santos, however, admitted that he informed the
    disciplinary committee of the allegations giving rise to this
    suit, refuting his claim of fear.     Santos has not shown that the
    district court erred in its ruling.     Thus, judgment of the
    district court is AFFIRMED.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 03-41517

Judges: Smith, Demoss, Stewart

Filed Date: 4/28/2004

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/6/2024