208 F.3d 213 (6th Cir. 2000), 99-5544, Goss v. Myers
|Citation:||208 F.3d 213|
|Party Name:||Robert Lee GOSS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Kevin MYERS; Jim Rose; Donal Campbell, Defendants-Appellees.|
|Case Date:||January 28, 2000|
|Court:||United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit|
This opinion appears in the Federal reporter in a table titled "Table of Decisions Without Reported Opinions". (See FI CTA6 Rule 28 and FI CTA6 IOP 206 regarding use of unpublished opinions)
Before JONES, NORRIS, and SILER, Circuit Judges.
Robert Lee Goss, a Tennessee prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, appeals a district court order dismissing his 42 U.S .C.A. § 1983 (West 1999) civil rights complaint as frivolous pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. § 1915(e)(2) (West 1999). This case has been referred to a panel of the court pursuant to Rule 34(j)(1), Rules of the Sixth Circuit. Upon examination, this panel unanimously agrees that oral argument is not needed. Fed. R.App. P. 34(a).
On March 17, 1999, Goss filed a civil rights complaint against Kevin B. Myers, warden of the South Central Correctional Facility ("SCCF"); Jim Rose, assistant commissioner of the Tennessee Department of Corrections ("TDOC"); and Donal Campbell, commissioner of the TDOC. Relying upon the First and Fourteenth Amendments, Goss, who is incarcerated at the Riverbend Maximum Security Institution ("RMSI"), alleged that the defendants violated his constitutional rights of free speech, expression, and religion by rejecting mail that he had sent to Gary Freeman, an inmate who is incarcerated at SCCF. Goss contended that he is a "Hebrew Isrealite [sic ] Identity Christian/White Separatist" and that the mail that he attempted to send to Freeman involved literature and materials concerning his religious beliefs.
Goss further alleged that he did not receive notice of the rejection of his mail, as required by TDOC policy regulations, and that the defendants failed "to reasonably respond in a meaningful and clear manner to [his] grievances and letters of appeal." In addition, Goss alleged that he has been transferred from one maximum security prison to another "as a means of punishment for his religious beliefs" and because he has filed grievances and lawsuits against prison officials. Goss sued the defendants in their individual and official capacities and sought declaratory, injunctive, and monetary relief.
On March 19, 1999, the district court dismissed Goss's complaint as frivolous pursuant to § 1915(e)(2). Following the district court's order, Goss filed a motion to alter or amend the judgment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 59(e), which the district court denied. Goss has filed a timely appeal, contending that the district court improperly dismissed his complaint. Goss requests appointment of counsel in his appellate brief. In...
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP