Vincente Ortiz v. Giles W. Dalby Corrtl Facil, et al

Filing

UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [10-10296 Affirmed ] Judge: CDK , Judge: FPB , Judge: JWE Mandate pull date is 10/20/2010 [10-10296]

Vincente Ortiz v. Giles W. Dalby Corrtl Facil, et al

Doc. 0

Case: 10-10296

Document: 00511247641

Page: 1

Date Filed: 09/29/2010

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit FILED
N o . 10-10296 S u m m a r y Calendar September 29, 2010 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk

V I N C E N T E ORTIZ, P la in t if f -A p p e lla n t , v. G I L E S W. DALBY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY; S. A. HOLENCIK; WARDEN L . J. RASBEARY; ASSOCIATE WARDEN H. BRYAN, D e fe n d a n t s -A p p e lle e s .

A p p e a l from the United States District Court fo r the Northern District of Texas U S D C No. 5:07-CV-261

B e fo r e KING, BENAVIDES, and ELROD, Circuit Judges. P E R CURIAM:* V in c e n t e Ortiz, formerly federal prisoner # 64845-208, appeals the district c o u r t's dismissal of his complaint brought pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown N a m e d Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), in which he a lle g e d that prison officials negligently or maliciously lost his personal property a n d caused him psychological impairment and an inability to trust authority. The district court, concluding that Ortiz had failed to show a due process

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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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.

*

Dockets.Justia.com

Case: 10-10296

Document: 00511247641 Page: 2 No. 10-10296

Date Filed: 09/29/2010

v io la t io n , dismissed the complaint as frivolous and for failure to state a claim. Because the district court cited 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915, 1915A, and 42 U.S.C. § 1997e, w e review the dismissal de novo. Geiger v. Jowers, 404 F.3d 371, 373 (5th Cir. 2 0 0 5 ). T h e negligent deprivation of property by a government official does not a m o u n t to a due process violation. Daniels v. Williams, 474 U.S. 327, 332-33 (1 9 8 6 ). Moreover, Oritz has failed to state a claim that correctional officers in t e n t io n a lly deprived him of his property. Accordingly, the judgment of the d is t r ic t court is AFFIRMED.

2