Raymond v. Wackenhut Corp

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-30629
Conference Calendar

ARTHUR RAYMOND,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

WACKENHUT CORPORATION; TERRY TERRELL;
O. KENT ANDREWS; BECK, Warden,

Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Louisiana
USDC No. 97-CV-1299
- - - - - - - - - -

February 9, 1999

Before BARKSDALE and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.*

PER CURIAM:**

Arthur Raymond, Louisiana prisoner #132634, appeals from the

dismissal of his civil rights action as frivolous. Raymond

contends that the confiscation of his transcripts from a fellow

prisoner violated his right of access to the courts; violated the

Due Process Clause; and violated the Cruel and Unusual Punishment

Clause.

*
This matter is being decided by a quorum. 28 U.S.C. §
46(d).
**
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 98-30629
-2-

Regarding Raymond’s access-to-the-courts contention, we have

reviewed the record and Raymond’s brief and we find no

nonfrivolous issue. Accordingly, in regard to that issue, we

dismiss Raymond’s appeal for essentially the reasons relied upon

by the district court. Raymond v. Wackenhut Corp., No. 97-CV-

1299 (W.D. La. Apr. 21, 1998).

Louisiana provides adequate state-law remedies for

deprivations of property. Marshall v. Norwood, 741 F.2d 761,

763-64 (5th Cir. 1984). Raymond has failed to show any due

process violation resulting from the confiscation of his

property.

Raymond does not offer factual or legal arguments to support

his Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause contention beyond the

mere mention of the issue. He has failed to brief that issue for

appeal. Brinkmann v. Dallas County Deputy Sheriff Abner, 813

F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987).

APPEAL DISMISSED. 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.