Richard C. Pepperling v. Henry Risley, Warden, Montana State Prison

Ninth Circuit

Richard C. Pepperling v. Henry Risley, Warden, Montana State Prison

739 F.2d 443, 39 Fed. R. Serv. 2d 980, 1984 U.S. App. LEXIS 19941

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedAugust 1, 1984

Docket83-3862

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 739 F.2d 443 (Richard C. Pepperling v. Henry Risley, Warden, Montana State Prison) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Richard C. Pepperling v. Henry Risley, Warden, Montana State Prison, 739 F.2d 443, 39 Fed. R. Serv. 2d 980, 1984 U.S. App. LEXIS 19941 (9th Cir. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

In Pepperling v. Crist, 678 F.2d 787 (9th Cir.1982), we held that the warden’s blanket prohibition against prisoners’ receipt of nude photographs of their wives and girlfriends was invalid as overbroad and ordered that a less restrictive alternative be adopted. The warden neither sought review of our decision by this court on a petition for rehearing or rehearing en banc nor review by the Supreme Court. After remand, he continued enforcing the same rule on nude photographs that we had invalidated and refused to implement a less restrictive alternative. The warden presented no new arguments before the district court, but merely continued to argue that this court’s final order was erroneous. The district court reaffirmed our order by setting aside the offending regulation, but leaving open to the prison officials the establishment of a less restrictive regulation. The warden appeals.

We dismiss the appeal because it is frivolous and brought in bad faith to vex, annoy, and delay. See De Witt v. Western Pacific, 719 F.2d 1448, 1451 (9th Cir.1983). Accordingly, we award double costs and damages, to include attorneys’ fees, to plaintiffs. 28 U.S.C. § 1912 (1982); Fed.R. App.P. 38. We remand to the district court to determine the amounts. See De Witt, 719 F.2d at 1452.

APPEAL DISMISSED and REMANDED.

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

ORDER

In Pepperling v. Crist, 678 F.2d 787 (9th Cir.1982), we held that the warden’s blanket prohibition against prisoners’ receipt of nude photographs of their wives and girlfriends was invalid as overbroad and ordered that a less restrictive alternative be adopted. The warden neither sought review of our decision by this court on a petition for rehearing or rehearing en banc nor review by the Supreme Court. After remand, he continued enforcing the same rule on nude photographs that we had invalidated and refused to implement a less restrictive alternative. The warden presented no new arguments before the district court, but merely continued to argue that this court’s final order was erroneous. The district court reaffirmed our order by setting aside the offending regulation, but leaving open to the prison officials the establishment of a less restrictive regulation. The warden appeals.

We dismiss the appeal because it is frivolous and brought in bad faith to vex, annoy, and delay. See De Witt v. Western Pacific, 719 F.2d 1448, 1451 (9th Cir.1983). Accordingly, we award double costs and damages, to include attorneys’ fees, to plaintiffs. 28 U.S.C. § 1912 (1982); Fed.R. App.P. 38. We remand to the district court to determine the amounts. See De Witt, 719 F.2d at 1452.

APPEAL DISMISSED and REMANDED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

739 F.2d 443, 39 Fed. R. Serv. 2d 980, 1984 U.S. App. LEXIS 19941, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/richard-c-pepperling-v-henry-risley-warden-montana-state-prison-ca9-1984.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack