IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-11098
Summary Calendar
ALVIN COLEMAN,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
BRUCE WAYNE WORTHAM, # 584610, Price Daniel Unit;
T.J. MEDART, Warden, Price Daniel Unit; NFN SWEETEN,
Assistant Warden, Price Daniel Unit; MAJOR SMITH,
Price Daniel Unit; CAPTAIN RANSBURGER, Price Daniel
Unit; NFN ROTH, State Unit Classification,
Price Daniel Unit
Defendants-Appellees.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 5:00-CV-181-C
--------------------
March 23, 2001
Before EMILIO M. GARZA, STEWART, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Alvin Coleman, Texas inmate # 665951, appeals the dismissal
of his civil rights suit under 28 U.S.C. 1915A. Coleman argues
that he is entitled to the restoration of his good-time credits
and to compensatory and punitive damages because his due process
rights were violated during a disciplinary proceeding. Because
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 00-11098
-2-
Coleman has not shown that his conviction or sentence has not
been invalidated, he fails to state a claim, and the district
court’s dismissal was proper. See Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S.
477, 487 (1994); Edwards v. Balisok, 520 U.S. 641 (1997).
Coleman argues that the defendants’ refusal to provide him
with a safe environment was a violation of his Eighth Amendment
rights against cruel and unusual punishment. Coleman has alleged
only that another inmate made verbal threats against him. The
Prison Litigation Reform Act prohibits prisoners from recovering
for mental or emotional injury suffered while in prison, absent a
showing of physical injury. 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(e); Jones v.
Greninger, 188 F.3d 322, 326 (5th Cir. 1999). Thus, this claim
is subject to dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A.
Coleman argues that after he filed grievances about Inmate
Wortham he was falsely accused of being at the scene of a riot.
A prison official may not retaliate against or harass an inmate
for exercising his right of access to the courts or other First
Amendment rights. Woods v. Smith, 60 F.3d 1161, 1164 (5th Cir.
1995). If Coleman’s allegation that prison officials filed a
false disciplinary report against him because he filed grievances
about Inmate Wortham’s verbal threats is true, Coleman has
sufficiently alleged that he exercised a constitutional right and
that he suffered an adverse act. Thus, the district court’s
No. 00-11098
-3-
dismissal of this portion of Coleman’s suit is vacated, and the
case is remanded for further proceedings.
AFFIRMED IN PART; VACATED AND REMANDED IN PART