Ingram v. State of Texas ( 2000 )

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 98-41234
CHESTER WILLIAM INGRAM, JR.,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
STATE OF TEXAS; TEXAS BOARD OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE; TEXAS
DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE-INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION
COMPANY DEPARTMENTS; UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL
BRANCH; MANAGED HEALTH CARE SYSTEM; WAYNE SCOTT,
DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE,
INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION; GARY L. JOHNSON, DIRECTOR,
TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, INSTITUTIONAL
DIVISION; JOSEPH KEITH PRICE, Senior Warden, Coffield
Unit; MICHAEL A. UPSHAW, Assistant Warden, Coffield
Unit; KEVIN MOORE, Assistant Warden, Coffield Unit;
HILTON C. BRYANT, Classification Chief, Coffield Unit;
BILL LAYTON, Infirmary Administrator Coffield Unit;
TIMOTHY S. BOSTIC, Captain, Coffield Unit; GARY L.
GRIGGS, Captain, Coffield Unit; BERNIE L. BUSH,
Captain, Coffield Unit; KEVIN JANUARY, Captain,
Coffield Unit; DANNY L. CHURCHMAN, Lieutenant, Coffield
Unit; KENNETH THOMPSON, Lieutenant, Coffield Unit;
PHILLIP CRUTCHER, Lieutenant, Coffield Unit; LEIGH A.
BROOKS, Lieutenant, Coffield Unit; TONIA L. BROWN,
Lieutenant, Coffield Unit; J.C. GANN, JR., Lieutenant,
Coffield Unit; KENNETH WILBANKS, Sergeant, Coffield
Unit; DAVID L. CARTER, Sergeant, Coffield Unit; STEVEN
WILLIAMS, Sergeant, Coffield Unit; MITCHELL DUBOSE,
Sergeant, Coffield Unit; REBECCA LANIER, Sergeant,
Coffield Unit; RONALD JOHNSON, Sergeant, Coffield Unit;
MARK G. LAYTON, Sergeant, Coffield Unit; BELINDA MAPLE,
Sergeant, Coffield Unit; MICHAEL L. CHIVERS,
Correctional Officer III, Coffield Unit; CECELIA H.
SWEENEY, Correctional Officer III, Coffield Unit;
BENJAMIN L. SMITH, Correctional Officer III, Coffield
Unit; CHARLES R. ADAMS, JR., Correctional Officer III,
Coffield Unit; ELLIS W. WATSON, Correctional Officer
III, Coffield Unit; CHARLES BRISTOW, Correctional
Officer III, Coffield Unit; SCOTT L. HOLLEY,
Correctional Officer III, Coffield Unit; DAVID S.
KASSOW, Correctional Officer III, Coffield Unit;
ANTHONY CARLILE, Correctional Officer III, Coffield
Unit; KENNETH W. COOK, Correctional Officer III,
Coffield Unit; KENNETH BREWER, Correctional Officer
III, Coffield Unit; MICKEY L. DEAN, Correctional
Officer III, Coffield Unit; CHAD E. KELLEY,
Correctional Officer III, Coffield Unit; GENE D.
NAQUIN, Correctional Officer III, Coffield Unit; JOHN
H. HOLMES, Correctional Officer III, Coffield Unit;
JASON A BOMER, Correctional Officer III, Coffield Unit;
VICKIE BELVIN, Correctional Officer III, Coffield Unit;
WILLIAM R. GREEN, Correctional Officer III, Coffield
Unit; J.A. MATTHEWS, Correctional Officer III, Coffield
Unit; EDWARD MILLER, Correctional Officer III, Coffield
Unit; DAVID FAUGHT, Correctional Officer III, Coffield
Unit; TIMOTHY TODD, Correctional Officer III, Coffield
Unit; SHANE FARMER, Correctional Officer III, Coffield
Unit; MICAH N. GROS, Correctional Officer III, Coffield
Unit; BILLY G. HART, Correctional Officer III, Coffield
Unit; UNIDENTIFIED CRAWFORD, MD; THOMAS C. FORD, MD;
SRINIVAS REDDY, MD; CAROLINE FOUNTAIN, RN; KAROL WADE
BAY, Psych Counselor; RALPH D. ROUSE, JR.; JESSICA
GINSBURG; DEVAL PATRICK; OWEN MURRAY, MD; JAMES V.
MEYER, MD; UNKNOWN DIXON, Physician Assistant; JAMES A.
SMITH, RN; DAVID DEFOOR, RN; PATRICIA MONTOYA; ARTHUR
PEABODY; HORACE DAWSON; MICHAEL K. NEHRING; NORRIS
KNOX; CHARLOTTE D. WARE; GERALD TILLISON, JR.; FRANK
HOKE; GREGORY MOORE; JERRY PETERSON; RANDY BARRETT; KAY
SHEELY; RANDOLPH MCVEY; J.B. WARREN; JAMES SHAW; KEITH
PRICE; NAOMI MILTON; UNIDENTIFIED MORROW,
Defendants-Appellees.
_______________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Texas
(6:97-CV-719)
_______________________________
January 4, 2000
Before JOLLY, EMILIO M. GARZA and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Appellant Chester William Ingram, Jr. (“Ingram”) appeals
from the district court’s dismissal of his claims under the
Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C. § 12132 et
*
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 5ht Cir. R.47.5.4.
2
seq., and for cruel and unusual punishment, retaliation and
denial of religious freedom pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Ingram
also complains of the district court’s assessment of filing fees
as impairing the obligation of contracts in violation of article
10, clause 1 of the United States Constitution (“the contract
clause”).
Neither Ingram’s allegation of insufficient time to eat, nor
his complaint about being denied permission to keep a laptop
computer and printer in his cell, state a claim under the ADA for
denial of a service by a public entity because of a disability.
We therefore affirm the district court’s dismissal of the ADA
claims.
Furthermore, a review of the record reveals no reversible
error in the dismissal of the § 1983 claims. Ingram has not
alleged facts sufficiently severe to state claims for cruel and
unusual punishment, retaliation or denial of religious freedom.
Finally, the contract clause applies only to the states; it
does not apply to the federal government. See, e.g., City of New
Brunswick v. Borough of Milltown, 686 F.2d 120, 126 n.5 (3d Cir.
1982). Therefore, Ingram’s claim in this regard is frivolous.
We therefore affirm the district court on this claim as well.
AFFIRMED
3