Pitre v. Tommie

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-50116
Conference Calendar
MITCHEL PITRE,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
J. TOMMIE; N. ARMSTRONG; JUAN R. PASENO;
JUAN F. GAYTAN,
Defendants-Appellees.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. SA-96-CV-34
- - - - - - - - - -
June 25, 1996
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, BARKSDALE, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Mitchel Pitre, no. 593925, appeals the dismissal of his
prisoner civil rights complaint as frivolous. Pitre contends
that he was a victim of sex discrimination due to the removal of
female guards from his pod in administrative segregation; that
the conditions of his confinement violated the Eighth Amendment
due to the occasional denial of showers, clean clothes, clean
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 96-50116
- 2 -
sheets, and breakfast trays; that his rights were violated
because the prisoners on his pod were labeled troublemakers and
“mess-ups”; that defendant Brysch conspired with the other
defendants to deprive him of access to the courts; and that the
district court erred by imposing costs on him.
We have reviewed the record, Pitre’s brief, and the district
court’s order and we have found no reversible error. Regarding
all of Pitre’s claims other than his conditions-of-confinement
contention, we find the appeal from the dismissal of those claims
frivolous for essentially the reasons relied upon by the district
court. See Pitre v. Tommie, no. SA-96-CA-034 (W.D. Tex. Jan. 22,
1996). Regarding Pitre’s conditions-of-confinement contention,
the deprivations of which he complains were occasional and de
minimis and therefore did not infringe on his constitutionally
protected rights. Ammons v. Baldwin, 705 F.2d 1445, 1448 (5th
Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 465 U.S. 1006 (1984). Because the
appeal is frivolous, it is dismissed.
We caution Pitre that any additional frivolous appeals filed
by him will invite the imposition of sanctions. To avoid
sanctions, Pitre is further cautioned to review any pending
appeals to ensure that they do not raise arguments that are
frivolous because they previously have been decided by this
court.
Finally, because Pitre’s appeal is frivolous, his motion for
a protective order is DENIED.
No. 96-50116
- 3 -
APPEAL DISMISSED. 5TH CIR. R. 42.2. SANCTIONS WARNING
ISSUED.