Jackson v. Stroud ( 2000 )

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-30783
Summary Calendar
WADE P. JACKSON,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
LOUIS STROUD; ARMAND, Lieutenant;
TILLMAN, Lieutenant; BURL CAIN, Warden,
Louisiana State Penitentiary;
DORA RABALAIS; JEFF PELZ,
Defendants-Appellees.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Louisiana
USDC No. 96-CV-7482
--------------------
July 12, 2000
Before SMITH, BARKSDALE, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Wade P. Jackson, Louisiana prisoner # 113076, moves for
permission to file a supplemental brief. The motion is GRANTED.
Jackson has appealed the district court’s dismissal of his civil
rights complaint as frivolous pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e) and
1915A.
We find no error in the district court’s determination that
Jackson’s claims concerning lost or stolen property fail to
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 97-30783
-2-
allege a constitutional violation. Hudson v. Palmer, 468 U.S.
517, 532-534 (1984); Parratt v. Taylor, 451 U.S. 527, 541-44
(1981) (overruled in part not relevant here, Daniels v. Williams,
474 U.S. 327 (1986)); see Marshall v. Norwood, 741 F.2d 761,
763-64 (5th Cir. 1984).
Jackson’s claim that Ms. Rabalais and Warden Cain have
denied him access to the courts fails because he has failed to
demonstrate actual prejudice due to their failure to process his
administrative remedies in a timely fashion. Lewis v. Casey, 518
U.S. 343, 350-51 (1996); see Edmond v. Department of Public
Safety, 732 So. 2d 645, 649-50 (La. App.), writ denied, 745 So.
2d 32 (La. 1999), cert. denied, 120 S. Ct. 1718 (2000); Sims v.
Wackenhut Health Services, Inc., 708 So.2d 1140, 1141-43 (La.
App.) cert. denied, 718 So. 2d 417 (La. 1998); Jackson v. Kaylo,
708 So. 2d 820, 821-23 (La. App. 1998). We note that Jackson has
abandoned his claims against defendant Jeff Pelz. Brinkmann v.
Abner, 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987).
Accordingly, we AFFIRM. Our affirmance of the district
court’s dismissal of the complaint as frivolous counts as a
strike for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). In a prior case,
this court dismissed as frivolous Jackson’s appeal from the
district court’s dismissal of a civil rights complaint pursuant
to §§ 1915(e)and 1915A. Jackson v. Stalder, No. 98-30028 (5th
Cir. Nov. 6, 1998). Because Jackson now has “three strikes”
under § 1915(g), he may no longer proceed IFP in any civil action
or appeal filed while he is in prison unless he is under imminent
No. 97-30783
-3-
danger of serious physical injury. See § 1915(g); Adepegba v.
Hammons, 103 F.3d 383, 388 (5th Cir. 1996).
MOTION TO SUPPLEMENT GRANTED; AFFIRMED; APPELLANT BARRED.
See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).