Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-90-03146/USCOURTS-ca10-90-03146-0/pdf.json

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

---

, 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT 

DAVID RONALD BROWN, ) 

) 

Plaintiff-Appellant, ) 

) 

FIL 

Uniced St E D ates Court of A 

T enrh C · · ppeals 1rru1r 

OCT 16 199 

XOBBRT L. l-IOECKE 

Clerk R. 

v. ) 

) 

STEVEN DAVIES; RAYMOND ROBERTS; ) 

WAYNE SHIPMAN; DEFENDANT MADDEN;) 

and M. SLUSHER, ) 

No. 90-3146 

(D.C. No. 90-3116) 

(D. Kansas) 

) 

Defendants-Appellees. ) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

Submitted on the Briefs: 

Before MCKAY, MOORE, and BRORBY, Circuit Judges. 

This is an appeal from the dismissal of a prose§ 1983 civil 

action against prison authorities. The order of dismissal was 

predicated upon the trial court's conclusion the complaint was 

"legally frivolous." We affirm. 

*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: 90-3146 Document: 010110059651 Date Filed: 10/16/1990 Page: 1 
Although somewhat prolix, the complaint asserts plaintiff was 

subjected to reclassification in his prison employment contrary to 

the established rules of the Kansas State Penitentiary. Plaintiff 

claims that when he refused to obey the reclassification order on 

the ground it was improperly made, he was subjected to discipline. 

He adds that these actions deprived him of due process and equal 

protection and subjected him to cruel and unusual punishment. He 

sought declaratory judgment, injunctive relief, and monetary 

damages. 

Plaintiff's action is grounded upon his assertion of a 

constitutionally protected right to a particular confinement 

status. He complains that his status could not be changed without 

his participation in a reclassification review, and that 

reclassification without his participation violates the federal 

constitution. We have held, however, a state prisoner has no 

constitutionally protected interest in a particular confinement 

status. Levoy v. Mills, 788 F.2d 1437, 1440 (10th Cir. 1986) 

(citing Parenti v. Ponte, 727 F.2d 21, 23 (1st Cir. 1984)). Thus, 

Mr. Brown's basic premise is unfounded. Moreover, his refusal to 

accept his reclassification is not a privileged disobedience, and 

the punishment he received following a disciplinary hearing gives 

rise to no constitutional claim. For these reasons, we agree with 

the district court that the complaint was legally frivolous. 

AFFIRMED. The mandate shall issue forthwith . 

Entered for the Court 

John P. Moore 

Circuit Judge 

-2-

Appellate Case: 90-3146 Document: 010110059651 Date Filed: 10/16/1990 Page: 2