Greenberg v. Griffin

First Circuit

Greenberg v. Griffin

64 F. App'x 252

CourtCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit

DecidedMay 28, 2003

DocketNo. 02-1041

StatusPublished

This text of 64 F. App'x 252 (Greenberg v. Griffin) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the First Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Greenberg v. Griffin, 64 F. App'x 252 (1st Cir. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

After carefully considering the record and briefs on appeal, we affirm for substantially the reasons stated by the district court.

The appellant made no showing of any constitutional violation. West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 108 S.Ct. 2250, 101 L.Ed.2d 40 (1988) (42 U.S.C. § 1983 protects only federally-secured rights). First Amendment rights are subject to reasonable regulation. Among other problems, the appellant fails to develop any adequate argument on appeal that banning him from the campus was unreasonable, given his behavior. Widmar v. Vincent, 454 U.S. 263, 102 S.Ct. 269, 70 L.Ed.2d 440 (1981); Perry Educational Ass’n. v. Perry Local Educators’ Ass’n., 460 U.S. 37, 103 S.Ct. 948, 74 L.Ed.2d 794 (1983). Similarly, he makes no showing that his rights under the Fourth Amendment were violated. The arrest was supported by probable cause and the search was incident to a lawful arrest. United States v. Robinson, 414 U.S. 218, 94 S.Ct. 467, 38 L.Ed.2d 427 (1973). Finally, his attempt to suggest a factual dispute is meritless.

Affirmed. Loc . R. 27(c).

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

PER CURIAM.

After carefully considering the record and briefs on appeal, we affirm for substantially the reasons stated by the district court.

The appellant made no showing of any constitutional violation. West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 108 S.Ct. 2250, 101 L.Ed.2d 40 (1988) (42 U.S.C. § 1983 protects only federally-secured rights). First Amendment rights are subject to reasonable regulation. Among other problems, the appellant fails to develop any adequate argument on appeal that banning him from the campus was unreasonable, given his behavior. Widmar v. Vincent, 454 U.S. 263, 102 S.Ct. 269, 70 L.Ed.2d 440 (1981); Perry Educational Ass’n. v. Perry Local Educators’ Ass’n., 460 U.S. 37, 103 S.Ct. 948, 74 L.Ed.2d 794 (1983). Similarly, he makes no showing that his rights under the Fourth Amendment were violated. The arrest was supported by probable cause and the search was incident to a lawful arrest. United States v. Robinson, 414 U.S. 218, 94 S.Ct. 467, 38 L.Ed.2d 427 (1973). Finally, his attempt to suggest a factual dispute is meritless.

Affirmed. Loc . R. 27(c).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

64 F. App'x 252, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/greenberg-v-griffin-ca1-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack