Estrada v. Vose
Opinion
USCA1 Opinion
January 20, 1994
[NOT FOR PUBLICATION]
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
____________________
No. 93-1508
LUIS M. ESTRADA, JR.,
Plaintiff, Appellant,
v.
GEORGE A. VOSE, JR.,
Defendant, Appellee.
____________________
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND
[Hon. Ronald R. Lagueux, U.S. District Judge]
___________________
____________________
Before
Cyr, Boudin and Stahl,
Circuit Judges.
______________
____________________
Luis M. Estrada, Jr. on brief pro se.
____________________
Michael B. Grant, Senior Legal Counsel, Rhode Island Department
_________________
of Corrections, on brief for appellee.
____________________
____________________
Per Curiam. Appellant Luis M. Estrada, Jr. filed a
__________
civil rights action in the Rhode Island district court. He
is serving a sentence pursuant to a Rhode Island conviction
and currently is incarcerated in the federal penitentiary in
Terre Haute, Indiana. He raises two issues on appeal: (1)
whether his constitutional right of access to the courts has
been infringed due to his incarceration in Indiana; and (2)
whether he has a constitutional right of access to his prison
files to correct allegedly erroneous information placed there
as a result of the investigation leading up to the transfer
decision. Although the district court did not address these
issues, the generality of the first claim and the speculative
nature of the second make a remand unnecessary.
We review a grant of summary judgment de novo.
________
Goldman v. First Nat'l Bank of Boston, 985 F.2d 1113, 1116
_______ ___________________________
(1st Cir. 1993). In so doing, we view the record in the
light most favorable to the nonmovant, indulging all
reasonable inferences in his or her favor. Garside v. Osco
_______ ____
Drug, Inc., 895 F.2d 46, 48 (1st Cir. 1990). In relation to
__________
issues on which appellant bears the burden of proof, however,
he is obligated to "reliably demonstrate that specific facts
sufficient to create an authentic dispute exist." See id.
___ ___
That is, he "must produce evidence which would be admissible
at trial to make out the requisite issue of material fact."
See Kelly v. United States, 924 F.2d 355,357 (1st Cir. 1991).
___ _____ _____________
A. Access to Courts
________________
It is "established beyond doubt that prisoners have
a constitutional right of access to the courts." Bounds v.
______
Smith, 430 U.S. 817, 821 (1977). To meet this standard,
_____
prison authorities must "assist inmates in the preparation
and filing of meaningful legal papers by providing prisoners
with adequate law libraries or adequate assistance from
persons trained in the law." Id. at 828 (footnote omitted).
___
Appellant has alleged the following facts in support of his
assertion that prison officials have not met the requirements
of Bounds.
______
First, he states that the prison library in Indiana
does not contain any sources of Rhode Island law and that
there is no one at the prison familiar with Rhode Island law.
This situation has impeded appellant in the prosecution of a
state post-conviction review proceeding to reduce his
sentence; he asserts that the matter currently is on appeal
and that he has had to file a "pre-brief statement in the
blind." Appellant has not submitted copies of any of the
pleadings he has filed in the state courts nor does he refer
to the titles or docket numbers of these alleged state court
actions.
The ACI official, Joseph DiNitto, who has been
appointed to assist appellant with his legal needs wrote a
letter to appellant. In it, he states that there are no
-3-
cases concerning appellant pending in the Rhode Island
Supreme Court and only one case in the state Superior Court
(in which no action had been taken for several months). In
the letter, DiNitto also offers to assist appellant with his
legal needs. However, DiNitto goes on, appellant must
provide more detailed information concerning the status of
his state cases and must be more specific concerning the
research material appellant requires. Finally, DiNitto
inquired whether appellant had contacted the Office of the
Public Defender for assistance.
Based on the above, we do not think that appellant
has submitted sufficient evidence to demonstrate the
existence of an issue of material fact. Significantly, there
is no indication that appellant ever responded to DiNitto's
letter. The fact that appellant was "highly skeptical" that
DiNitto could held him is, at best, an "arrant speculation"
and cannot suffice to defeat summary judgment. See Kelly,
___ _____
924 F.2d at 357. The letter requested reasonable information
and, in the absence of any evidence that upon receiving such
data from appellant, DiNi
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Estrada v. Vose, (1st Cir. 1994).
Estrada v. Vose (Estrada v. Vose) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Bounds v. Smith
430 U.S. 817 (Supreme Court, 1977)
Frederick Robert Paine v. Ben L. Baker, Supervisor of Records, and the North Carolina Department of Corrections
595 F.2d 197 (Fourth Circuit, 1979)
Harry Slocum v. Georgia State Board Of Pardons And Paroles
678 F.2d 940 (Eleventh Circuit, 1982)
Milissa Garside v. Osco Drug, Inc.
895 F.2d 46 (First Circuit, 1990)
Celso Lopez, A/K/A Celso Lopez Lopez v. R.D. Garriga
917 F.2d 63 (First Circuit, 1990)
John L. Kelly v. United States
924 F.2d 355 (First Circuit, 1991)
Robert Goldman v. First National Bank of Boston
985 F.2d 1113 (First Circuit, 1993)
Cook v. Whiteside
505 F.2d 32 (Fifth Circuit, 1974)