Carl Bentley v. James Beck, Sheriff, and Leroy Glenn

Fifth Circuit

Carl Bentley v. James Beck, Sheriff, and Leroy Glenn

625 F.2d 70, 1980 U.S. App. LEXIS 14488

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedAugust 28, 1980

Docket80-7184

StatusPublished

Cited by19 cases

This text of 625 F.2d 70 (Carl Bentley v. James Beck, Sheriff, and Leroy Glenn) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Carl Bentley v. James Beck, Sheriff, and Leroy Glenn, 625 F.2d 70, 1980 U.S. App. LEXIS 14488 (5th Cir. 1980).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Plaintiff, a prisoner in Richmond County Jail in Augusta, Georgia, filed this 42 U.S. C.A. § 1983 action for injunctive and declaratory relief against the sheriff and kitchen orderly deputy of the jail. He alleged that several times he asked the deputy to permit him to work as an orderly in the jail kitchen and was twice told by the deputy that he would be appointed as soon as there was an opening for a “white boy.” Plaintiff alleges that several blacks have subsequently been put in the kitchen positions. It was also alleged that the deputy said that he did not like whites to work in the kitchen and as long as he was deputy he would only permit blacks to work there.

The district court dismissed the case without requiring a response. The court held that there is no constitutional right to be assigned any particular job in a prison, citing Bryan v. Werner, 516 F.2d 233 (3d Cir. 1975), and Gardner v. Johnson, 429 F.Supp. 432, 434 (E.D. Mich. 1977). Appel-lee’s brief makes the same argument.

Both the court’s order and appellee miss the point. As plaintiff states in his pro se brief, he is not claiming to have a constitutional right to a particular job. His claim is that his application for the position of kitchen orderly should not be denied solely because of his race, clearly unconstitutional conduct. While we have stated that prison officials must have broad discretion in classifying prisoners in terms of their custodial status, McGruder v. Phelps, 608 F.2d 1023, 1026 (5th Cir. 1979), this does not permit prison officials to engage in the type of overt racial discrimination alleged here. Inmates have the constitutional right to be *71 free from racial discrimination. Martin v. Wainwright, 525 F.2d 983 (5th Cir. 1976); Henry v. Van Cleve, 469 F.2d 687 (5th Cir. 1972).

The judgment of the district court is reversed and the case remanded for further proceedings.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM:

Plaintiff, a prisoner in Richmond County Jail in Augusta, Georgia, filed this 42 U.S. C.A. § 1983 action for injunctive and declaratory relief against the sheriff and kitchen orderly deputy of the jail. He alleged that several times he asked the deputy to permit him to work as an orderly in the jail kitchen and was twice told by the deputy that he would be appointed as soon as there was an opening for a “white boy.” Plaintiff alleges that several blacks have subsequently been put in the kitchen positions. It was also alleged that the deputy said that he did not like whites to work in the kitchen and as long as he was deputy he would only permit blacks to work there.

The district court dismissed the case without requiring a response. The court held that there is no constitutional right to be assigned any particular job in a prison, citing Bryan v. Werner, 516 F.2d 233 (3d Cir. 1975), and Gardner v. Johnson, 429 F.Supp. 432, 434 (E.D. Mich. 1977). Appel-lee’s brief makes the same argument.

Both the court’s order and appellee miss the point. As plaintiff states in his pro se brief, he is not claiming to have a constitutional right to a particular job. His claim is that his application for the position of kitchen orderly should not be denied solely because of his race, clearly unconstitutional conduct. While we have stated that prison officials must have broad discretion in classifying prisoners in terms of their custodial status, McGruder v. Phelps, 608 F.2d 1023, 1026 (5th Cir. 1979), this does not permit prison officials to engage in the type of overt racial discrimination alleged here. Inmates have the constitutional right to be *71 free from racial discrimination. Martin v. Wainwright, 525 F.2d 983 (5th Cir. 1976); Henry v. Van Cleve, 469 F.2d 687 (5th Cir. 1972).

The judgment of the district court is reversed and the case remanded for further proceedings.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

55 Fair empl.prac.cas. 390, 55 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 40,577 Haywood Williams, Jr. v. Edwin Meese Norman A. Carlson Jerry O'Brien Superintendent, Federal Prison Industries Job Placement Supervisor Usp Leavenworth Chaplain Craig Chaplain Mabry Mr. Spencer, Librarian Mr. Vincent, Recreation Supv. Mr. Gerald Austin Mr. Gaunce Mr. Anderson Dr. Hill Mr. Hackler Mr. Morris Commissary Supervisor Mr. Simpson, Job Placement Officer Unknown Members of the Institution Inmate Work and Performance Comm. And Mr. M. Hammeke

926 F.2d 994 (Tenth Circuit, 1991)

Terrell v. State

573 So. 2d 732 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1990)

Charron v. Medium SEC. Inst.

730 F. Supp. 987 (E.D. Missouri, 1989)

M. C. Griffin v. Suzanne Kallen Joanne Bach and Perry M. Johnson

791 F.2d 933 (Sixth Circuit, 1986)

Watts v. Morgan

572 F. Supp. 1385 (N.D. Illinois, 1983)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

625 F.2d 70, 1980 U.S. App. LEXIS 14488, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/carl-bentley-v-james-beck-sheriff-and-leroy-glenn-ca5-1980.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack