Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-89-02044/USCOURTS-ca10-89-02044-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 

---

flL.LlD 

UNITED STATES COORT OF APPEALS 

TENTH CIRCUIT 

Unired Sratei; (oun of Appeals 

T~'nth (jrr11i, 

VINCENT HENRY WIGGINS, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v. 

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; and 

WILLIAM RIVERA, Lt. 

Defendants-Appellees. 

F°EB 8 1990 

ROBERT L HOECKER 

> Clerk 

} 

} 

} 

} No. 89-2044 

} (D.C. No. CV-87-0609JC} 

} (D. New Mexico} 

} 

} 

} 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

Before TACHA, BALDOCK and BRORBY, Circuit Judges. 

SUBMITTED ON THE BRIEFS: 

After examining the briefs and the appellate record, this 

three-judge panel has determined unanimously that oral argumen~ 

wou_ld not be of material assistance in the determination of this 

appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a}} 10th Cir. R. 34.1.S(c} and 

27.1.2. The cause is, therefore, ordered submitted without oral 

argument. 

* This order and judgment has no precedential value and shall 

not be cited, or used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, 

except for purposes of establishing the doctrines of the law of 

the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. 10th Cir. R. 

36.3. 

Appellate Case: 89-2044 Document: 01019962973 Date Filed: 02/08/1990 Page: 1 
Mr. Wiggins appeals E!.9_ se the district court's decision 

dismissing his amended complaint for failure to state a claim. 

In his prose amended complaint, Mr. Wiggins, an inmate in a 

New Mexico state prison, sued nine individual defendants and the 

New Mexico Department of Corrections under 42 u.s.c. § 1983. Mr. 

Wiggins alleged that certain of his books were lost when he was 

transferred from one facility to another within the penitentiary. 

He further alleged that the books concerned religion or sorcery, 

and that their loss violates his First Amendment right to the free 

exercise of religion and his Fourteenth Amendment rights to due 

process and equal protection. Mr. Wiggins requested $580 in 

actual damages and $450,000 punitive damages plus various other 

costs. 

The sufficiency of a complaint is a question of law which we 

review de novo. In reviewing the dismissal of a complaint, all 

well-pleaded facts, as distinguished from conclusory allegations, 

must be taken as true. Dunn v. White, 880 F.2d 1188, 1190 (10th 

Cir.), cert. denied, U.S.L.W. (U.S. Jan. 22, 1990) (No. 

89-5609). 

As to appellant's First Amendment claim, appellant alleges 

that he has been deprived of books on "religion" or "sorcery.'' He 

does not specifically identify the books, his religion or his 

religious beliefs. Where a plaintiff fails to offer specific allegations regarding his religious faith, he fails to state a claim 

-2-

Appellate Case: 89-2044 Document: 01019962973 Date Filed: 02/08/1990 Page: 2 
• 

for violation of his right to religious freedom. Dunn, 880 F.2d 

at 1197-98. Conclusory recitations of the words "religion" and 

"religious beliefs" are insufficient to sustain a First Amendment 

claim. Id. 

Appellant also alleged that the prison officials deprived him 

of his property without due process. The amended complaint leaves 

the exact circumstances of the alleged deprivation unclear. 

However, assuming appellant alleged a negligent deprivation of 

property, his claim is not cognizable under S 1983. Davidson v. 

Cannon, 474 U.S. 344, 348 (1986} ("the protections of the Due 

Process Clause, whether procedural or substantive, are just not 

triggered by lack of due care by prison officials"}. If appellant 

alleged an intentional deprivation of his property, he cannot 

recover if the state of New Mexico offers an adequate post 

deprivation state remedy. Hudson v. Palmer, 468 U.S. 517, 533 

(1984) ("For intentional, as for negligent deprivations of 

property by state employees, the state's action is not complete 

until and unless it provides or refuses to provide a suitable 

postdeprivation remedy"}. New Mexico offers such a remedy through 

the New Mexico Tort Claims Act, N.M. Stat. Ann. SS 41-4-1 to 41-4-

16.1 (1989). 

Finally, appellant failed to state an equal protection claim. 

The district court properly found that appellant "failed to allege I 

facts establishing his membership in an identifiable class or that 

-3-

Appellate Case: 89-2044 Document: 01019962973 Date Filed: 02/08/1990 Page: 3 
• 

the class in question has been subjected to discriminatory treatment by [d]efendants." Doc. 22 at 2. 

The district court properly dismissed plaintiff's complaint 

for failure to state a claim. 

contrary are without merit. 

Plaintiff's arguments to the 

The action of the district court is therefore AFFIRMED. The . 

mandate shall issue forthwith. 

Entered for the Court: 

WADE BRORBY 

United States Circuit Judge 

-4-

Appellate Case: 89-2044 Document: 01019962973 Date Filed: 02/08/1990 Page: 4