Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-90-07042/USCOURTS-ca10-90-07042-0/pdf.json

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

---

Fl LED 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALSJoited St.it~ Couci- of Ap~ 

Tend•· Ci:::uit 

TENTH CIRCUIT 

ROBBY G. JOHNSON, ) 

) 

Plaintiff-Appellant, ) 

) 

V • ) 

) 

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; JAMES ) 

SAFFLE; GARY MAYNARD; BOBBY BOONE; ) 

JIM SORRELS; and DANNY NACE, ) 

) 

Defendants-Appellees. ) 

JAN 9 1§91 

ROBERT L HOECKER 

Clerk 

No. 90-7042 

(D.C. No. 89-559-C-S) 

( E . D. Okla~ ) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

Before McKAY, MOORE, and BRORBY, Circuit Judges. 

Petitioner's Motion for Leave to Proceed on Appeal Without 

Prepayment of Costs or Fees in hereby GRANTED. 

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel 

has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially 

assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 

34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The case 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: 90-7042 Document: 010110069696 Date Filed: 01/09/1991 Page: 1 
Petitioner, Robby G. Johnson, is appealing the district 

court's dismissal of his action pursuant to 42 u.s.c. § 1983 seeking declaratory and injunctive relief for claimed deprivations of 

his civil rights. Mr. Johnson, an inmate at the Oklahoma State 

Penitentiary in McAlester, Oklahoma, alleges that his First, 

Fifth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendment rights have been violated 

by th~ conditions of his confinement. Specifically, he complains 

of restricted access to the law library, inadequate medical care~ 

overcharging on canteen items, inadequate food and clothing, 

restrictions on his religious freedom, and anticipated conditions 

in a unit being built to house death row inmates. 

The district court dismissed Petitioner's action as legally 

frivolous under 28 U.S.C. S 191S(d). "Dismissal under 28 u.s.c. 

S 191S(d) is discretionary and our review must focus on whether 

the district court abused that discretion in dismissing the plaintiff's complaint." Yellen v. Cooper, 828 F.2d 1471, 1475 (10th 

Cir. 1987). We hold that the district court did not abuse its 

discretion, and AFFIRM the district court's order for substantially the reasons set out therein. 

The mandate shall issue forthwith. 

~2-

Entered for the Court 

Monroe G. McKay 

Circuit Judge 

Appellate Case: 90-7042 Document: 010110069696 Date Filed: 01/09/1991 Page: 2