Smith v. Arnett

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS DELTA DIVISION DENNIS JAMES SMITH, SR. PLAINTIFF ADC #120631 v. CASE NO. 2:22-CV-00081-BSM CALVIN ARNETT, et al. DEFENDANTS ORDER From the pleadings, it appears that Dennis James Smith, Sr. is alleging that he is serving a sentence of life of imprisonment and that he is attempting to research his case in the law library at the East Arkansas Regional Unit of the Arkansas Division of Correction.

The library, however, does not have the books or other resources he needs and he has not been able to receive help despite filing a grievance at the prison. Smith’s complaint fails to satisfy the pleading requirements for a section 1983 access to the courts claim. Consequently, after performing a de novo of the record, United States

Magistrate Judge Joe J. Volpe’s recommended disposition [Doc. No. 8] is adopted and this case is dismissed without prejudice for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. It is recommended that dismissal count as a strike for purposes for 28 U.S.C. section 1915(g). Smith’s motions for appointment of counsel [Doc. Nos. 11, 12] are denied

because he does not have a right to counsel in post-conviction relief proceedings. See Pollard v. Delo, 28 F.3d 887, 888 (8th Cir. 1994) (citing McClesky v. Zant, 499 U.S. 467, 494 (1991)). An in forma pauperis appeal would not be taken in good faith. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3). IT IS SO ORDERED this 20th day of July, 2022.

Brrr 2 Ae UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE