Donald Smith v. Collin County Jail
This text of 548 F. App'x 132 (Donald Smith v. Collin County Jail) 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.
Opinion
Donald Smith, Texas prisoner # 669727, appeals the summary judgment dismissal of a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Collin County Texas, Sheriff Box, and Lt. Frizell. 1 Smith alleges that, while he was confined at Collin County Jail on a bench warrant from October 4, 2011, to January 12, 2012, his constitutional right of access to the courts was violated because he was denied use of the jail’s law library. According to Smith, this denial of access prevented him from researching and preparing a state habeas application regarding his Dallas County conviction.
A district court’s grant of summary judgment is reviewed de novo. Berquist v. Washington Mut. Bank, 500 F.3d 344, 348 (5th Cir.2007). Pretrial detainees have a right of access to the courts. See Walker v. Navarro Cnty. Jail, 4 F.3d 410, 413 (5th Cir.1993). Lack of access to legal materials may constitute an unconstitutional infringement on a prisoner’s right of access to the courts. See Bounds v. Smith, 430 U.S. 817, 828, 97 S.Ct. 1491, 52 L.Ed.2d 72 (1977). To prevail on an aeeess-to-the-courts claim, a prisoner must show an actual injury. Lewis v. Casey, 518 U.S. 343, 349-51, 116 S.Ct. 2174, 135 L.Ed.2d 606 (1996). Such an injury is shown when the prisoner demonstrates that the policies or actions of prison officials have hindered his ability to file a nonfrivolous legal claim. See Christopher v. Harbury, 536 U.S. 403, 414-22, 122 S.Ct. 2179, 153 L.Ed.2d 413 (2002); Lewis, 518 U.S. at 351, 356, 116 S.Ct. 2174.
Smith’s allegations do not set forth an actual injury for purposes of a denial-of-access-to-courts claim. Smith did not show that his state habeas application would contain a nonfrivolous, arguable legal claim. See Christopher, 536 U.S. at 415-16, 122 S.Ct. 2179. Smith has not demonstrated an actual injury sufficient to establish a constitutional violation of his right of access to the courts. Lewis, 518 U.S. at 351, 356, 116 S.Ct. 2174.
Accordingly, the district court judgment is AFFIRMED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
548 F. App'x 132, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/donald-smith-v-collin-county-jail-ca5-2013.