USCA1 Opinion
May 15, 1996
[NOT FOR PUBLICATION]
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
____________________
No. 95-2158
JEROME E. CASSELL,
Plaintiff, Appellant,
v.
STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, ET AL.,
Defendants, Appellees.
____________________
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
[Hon. Paul J. Barbadoro, U.S. District Judge] ___________________
____________________
Before
Selya, Cyr and Lynch,
Circuit Judges. ______________
____________________
Jerome E. Cassell on brief pro se. _________________
____________________
____________________
Per Curiam. On a review of the complaint under 28 ___________
U.S.C. 1915(d), the district court dismissed the
"retaliatory transfer" claims because they were frivolous.
We are satisfied that there was no abuse of discretion since
the complaint's allegations cannot support an inference of
unlawful retaliation or conspiracy. Reviewing the dismissal
of appellant's other claims de novo, we find no error in the __ ____
jurisdictional dismissal of the claims challenging the
conditions of appellant's Virginia confinement and, following
an opportunity to amend, the dismissal with prejudice of the
claims alleging a deprivation of, or denial of access to,
personal property and legal materials. See Denton v. ___ ______
Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 34 (1992); Forte v. Sullivan, 935 _________ _____ ________
F.2d 1 (1st Cir. 1991).
Affirmed. ________
-2-