UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
For the Fifth Circuit
No. 97-40685
Summary Calendar
ANTHONY WAYNE WHITE,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
VERSUS
JAMES G. FERGUSON, Correctional Officer III;
SALLY J. PITTMAN, Counsel Substitute,
Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
For the Eastern District of Texas
(9:96-CV-368)
December 15, 1997
Before WISDOM, DUHÉ, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Texas prisoner Anthony Wayne White filed a civil rights
complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against two prison guards in which
he alleged that the presence of one of the defendants, a female,
during a body cavity search of his person violated his Fourth
Amendment right to privacy. The magistrate judge dismissed the
complaint with prejudice on the ground that White had failed to
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that
this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except
under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
state a claim upon which relief could be granted.2 White timely
filed this pro se appeal.
We agree with the magistrate judge’s conclusion. We have
stated that “no constitutional violation occurs when naked male
inmates are viewed by female guards if the presence of female
guards is required to protect a legitimate government interest such
as maintaining security at a correctional facility.”3 White failed
to show that the presence of the female guard was unrelated to the
maintenance of security at the prison facility. He has failed to
state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
White enumerates additional grievances in his brief, but he
has elaborated upon none of them. Although we construe liberally
the briefs of pro se appellants, we also require that arguments be
briefed to be preserved.4 White has abandoned all points of error
he failed to brief.5
AFFIRMED.
2
See 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2).
3
Letcher v. Turner, 968 F.2d 508, 510 (5th Cir. 1992)
4
Price v. Digital Equipment Corp., 846 F.2d 1026, 1028 (5th
Cir. 1988)
5
See Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 224-225 (5th Cir. 1993).
2