IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
__________________
No. 95-20671
Conference Calendar
__________________
CLIFTON RAY CHOYCE,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
ANGELA DYER,
TEDDY L. SMITH,
Defendants-Appellees.
---------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. H-95-CV-316
---------------------
December 19, 1995
Before DAVIS, STEWART, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
The district court dismissed as frivolous Clifton Choyce's
civil rights complaint wherein he alleged that he was charged and
found guilty of a disciplinary infraction in retaliation for
filing a lawsuit against one of the defendants. See 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(d). Although Choyce's allegation that he was found guilty
of the charge despite his innocence failed to state a claim under
*
Local Rule 47.5.1 provides: "The publication of
opinions that merely decide particular cases on the basis of
well-settled principles of law imposes needless expense on the
public and burdens on the legal profession." Pursuant to that
Rule, the court has determined that this opinion should not be
published.
No. 95-20671
-2-
42 U.S.C. § 1983, his claim of retaliation should have been
considered separate and apart from his claim regarding the
apparent validity of the underlying disciplinary report. See
Woods v. Smith, 60 F.3d 1161, 1165 (5th Cir. 1995). We
nevertheless AFFIRM the district court's dismissal of the
complaint because Choyce's allegations are insufficient to
establish a retaliation claim.
To state a claim of retaliation, an inmate must be prepared
to establish that, but for the retaliatory motive, the complained
of incident would not have occurred. Id. at 1166. This places a
significant burden on the inmate to produce direct evidence of
motivation or to allege a chronology of events from which
retalation may plausibly be inferred. Id. Choyce failed to meet
this significant burden; therefore, the district court's
dismissal of his complaint under § 1915 is AFFIRMED.