Mixon v. Henderson

No. 95-20713
- 1 -
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 95-20713
Summary Calendar
WILLIAM MIXON,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
ROY H. HENDERSON,
Defendant-Appellee.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. H-CA-90-3696
- - - - - - - - - -
May 1, 1996
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DUHE', and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
William Mixon appeals the district court’s grant of summary
judgment regarding his claim that Assistant Warden Roy H.
Henderson violated his constitutional right to access to the
courts when he terminated a legal visit between Mixon and his
attorneys’ representative and denied the representative further
legal visits. Mixon cannot demonstrate that he was prejudiced by
the terminated visit as his attorney was informed that he could
conduct legal visits with Mixon or find another legal
*
Pursuant to Local Rule 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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 Local Rule
47.5.4.
No. 95-20713
- 2 -
representative for such visits. See Henthorn v. Swinson, 955
F.2d 351, 354 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 988 (1992).
Henderson’s refusal to allow further legal visits with the
attorney’s representative in question was properly grounded in
security concerns considering the representative’s lying to
officials regarding the nature of her relationship with Mixon.
See Cruz v. Beto, 603 F.2d 1178, 1185 (5th Cir. 1979).
This court warns Mixon that the filing of frivolous appeals
could result in sanctions. E.g., Smith v. McCleod, 946 F.2d 417,
418 (5th Cir. 1991); Jackson v. Carpenter, 921 F.2d 68, 69 (5th
Cir. 1991). Mixon should review any other appeals pending in
this court at this time and move to withdraw any appeal that is
frivolous.
AFFIRMED. SANCTIONS WARNING ISSUED.