Russell v. Tarrant Cty Corr Ctr

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 96-11476 Summary Calendar CLYDE L. RUSSELL, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus TARRANT COUNTY CORRECTION FACILITY; DON WILLIAMS, Sheriff; Lieut; HUNTER, Officer #3914; SMITH, Officer #7389; Officer #8441, Defendants-Appellees. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:96-CV-723-A - - - - - - - - - - August 4, 1998 Before JOLLY, SMITH and WIENER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Clyde L. Russell, Texas prisoner #0196852, appeals the district court’s dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint as frivolous. He alleges that he was not afforded due process with his disciplinary hearing and that he was not afforded access to the courts. We review the district court’s dismissal of Russell’s § 1983 action for abuse of discretion. See Denton v. Hernandez, 504 * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. No. 96-11476 -2- U.S. 25, 33-34 (1992). Russell has not demonstrated that the disciplinary board’s sanctions against him affected the duration of his sentence or imposed a significant hardship on him in relation to the ordinary incidents of prison life, and his claims of due process violations regarding the disciplinary hearing are without merit. See Sandin v. Conner, 515 U.S. 472, 484-87 (1995). Nor has Russell established that he was unable to prepare and transmit necessary legal documents to the court or that he was prejudiced as a litigant from his alleged denial of his right of access to the courts. Brewer v. Wilinson, 3 F.3d 816, 821 (5th Cir. 1993); McDonald v. Steward, 132 F.3d 225, 230- 31 (5th Cir. 1998). The district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing Russell’s § 1983 action as frivolous. The district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED. Russell’s motion for leave to file a supplemental brief, in which he raises new civil rights complaints not presented to the district court, is DENIED.