Joseph v. Lewis

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
__________________
No. 96-30264
Summary Calendar
__________________
ALCY JOSEPH, JR.,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
RAQUEL LEWIS, Lt.,
Correctional Official at
St. Charles Parish, RICHARD
HINES, Cpl., Deputy Correctional
Officer - St. Charles Parish;
CHARLES B. SMOTHERS, Warden, St.
Charles Parish Correctional Center
Defendants-Appellees.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Louisiana
USDC No. 96-CV-478
- - - - - - - - - -
July 30, 1996
Before JONES, DeMOSS and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Alcy Joseph, Jr., # 95760, argues that the district court
erred in dismissing as frivolous his claim that the defendant
prison officials deprived him of his constitutional right to
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 96-30264
-2-
exhaust his prison grievance remedies, which precluded him from
filing criminal charges against another correctional officer.
We have reviewed the record, the opinion of the district
court, and the brief, and find that the dismissal of the
complaint as frivolous should be affirmed for reasons other than
those adopted by the district court. See Bickford v. Int'l
Speedway Corp., 654 F.2d 1028, 1031 (5th Cir. 1981).
Insofar as Joseph alleges that he was denied procedural due
process in connection with the procedures employed in addressing
his grievances, his claim is barred by Sandin v. Conner, 115 S.
Ct. 2293, 2302 n.11 (1995).
Joseph's allegations that the defendants interfered with his
right to file criminal charges against a correctional officer
fail to support an arguable constitutional claim because he has
not demonstrated that he has standing to assert an interest in
the prosecution or nonprosecution of the officer. See Linda R.S.
v. Richard D. and Texas, 410 U.S. 614, 617-19 (1973).
The district court did not abuse its discretion in
dismissing the complaint as frivolous. See Denton v. Hernandez,
504 U.S. 25, 33 (1992).
AFFIRMED.