From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Butler v. Bowen

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Mar 12, 2003
58 F. App'x 712 (9th Cir. 2003)

Opinion


58 Fed.Appx. 712 (9th Cir. 2003) Dannie Lee BUTLER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. B. BOWEN; E. Roe; C.A. Terhune, Director, Defendants-Appellees. No. 01-55262. D.C. No. CV-00-12614-TJH. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. March 12, 2003

Submitted March 7, 2003.

This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION. (See Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure Rule 36-3)

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California, Terry J. Hatter, Jr., District Judge, Presiding.

Before LAY, HAWKINS, and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.

The Honorable Donald P. Lay, Senior United States Circuit Judge for the Eighth Circuit, sitting by designation.

MEMORANDUM

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

Plaintiff Dannie Lee Butler, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's denial of his application to file a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action in forma pauperis. The district court denied Butler's application, finding that he failed to state a claim on which relief might be granted. Butler alleges that prison officials violated his First Amendment right to petition the government for redress of his grievances by obstructing the filing of his written grievances.

In essence, Butler alleges that prison officials failed to comply with prison grievance procedures. In Mann v. Adams, 855 F.2d 639, 640 (9th Cir.1988), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 898, 109 S.Ct. 242, 102 L.Ed.2d 231 (1988), we held that a prisoner has no constitutional right to prison grievance procedures. See also Antonelli v. Sheahan, 81 F.3d 1422, 1430 (7th Cir.1996); Adams v. Rice, 40 F.3d 72, 75 (4th Cir.1994), cert. denied, 514 U.S. 1022, 115 S.Ct. 1371, 131 L.Ed.2d 227 (1995); Flick v. Alba, 932 F.2d 728, 729 (8th Cir.1991). Because inmates such as Butler do not have a substantive right to prison grievance procedures, the failure of prison officials to comply with those procedures is not actionable under § 1983. See Ashann-Ra v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 112 F.Supp.2d 559, 569 (W.D.Va.2000).

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

Butler v. Bowen

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Mar 12, 2003
58 F. App'x 712 (9th Cir. 2003)
Case details for

Butler v. Bowen

Case Details

Full title:Dannie Lee BUTLER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. B. BOWEN; E. Roe; C.A. Terhune…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Mar 12, 2003

Citations

58 F. App'x 712 (9th Cir. 2003)

Citing Cases

Soucy v. Me. Dep't of Corr.

ion to the ordinary incidents of prison life." Sandin v. Conner, 515 U.S. 472, 484 (1995); see also Flick v.…

Salazar v. Navarette

The Tenth Circuit has made it clear that “there is no . . . constitutional right to state administrative…