Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-03-40793/USCOURTS-ca5-03-40793-0/pdf.json

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

---

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

February 13, 2004

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 03-40793

Summary Calendar

 

BRANDON C. SAMPLE, and on behalf of all similarly

situated federal prisoners in the United States and its

territories,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS,

Defendant-Appellee.

--------------------

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. C-02-CV-265

--------------------

Before BARKSDALE, EMILIO M. GARZA, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

 Brandon C. Sample’s petition for panel rehearing is DENIED. 

The opinion of the court issued on November 21, 2003, 2003 WL

22770157, is withdrawn and the following is substituted:

Sample, federal prisoner # 33949-037, appeals the district

court’s dismissal of his civil rights and Administrative

Procedures Act (APA) action for failure to state a claim under 28

 Case: 03-40793 Document: 0051471843 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/13/2004
No. 03-40793

-2-

U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). Sample filed suit against the Bureau

of Prisons (BOP) to declare its promulgation and enforcement of

the Inmate Financial Responsibility Program (IFRP) as exceeding

the scope of its authority, and he sought to enjoin the BOP’s

enforcement of the IFRP against him and similarly situated

prisoners. Sample was convicted of numerous counts of mail and

securities fraud and, in addition to an imprisonment term, was

sentenced to pay $275,000 in restitution and $1,800 in special

assessment. 

Sample argues that the district court did not review his

claim under the APA and that he is not raising a challenge to his

sentence but, rather, a challenge to the BOP’s authority to

promulgate and apply the IFRP. 

We review a 28 U.S.C. § 1915 dismissal for failure to state

a claim under the same de novo standard of review applicable to

dismissals made pursuant to FED. R. CIV. P. 12(b)(6). Harris v.

Hegmann, 198 F.3d 153, 156 (5th Cir. 1999). We must determine

if, taking Sample’s allegations as true, no relief could be

granted based on those allegations. Id.

Sample should have raised his challenge to the restitution

aspect of his sentence on direct appeal. United States v.

Hatten, 167 F.3d 884, 887 & n.5 (5th Cir. 1999). The dismissal

of his complaint for failure to state a claim is AFFIRMED.

 Case: 03-40793 Document: 0051471843 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/13/2004