Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-89-02038/USCOURTS-ca10-89-02038-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Dareld Kerby
Appellee
Richard Ralph Martinez
Appellant
Santos Quintana
Appellee
Ernest Sanchez
Appellee

Document Text:

• 

, f l.nb 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT 

United ~fllt~~ tmii:r of Atl}:MJ1tls 

Tenth Circuit 

APR ., 4 1QQO 

ROBERT L. HOECKER 

Clerk 

RICHARD RALPH MARTINEZ, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v. 

ERNEST SANCHEZ, Associate Warden; 

DARELD KERBY, Warden of CNMCF; and 

SANTOS QUINTANA, Deputy Warden, and 

all others with them in active 

concert and participation, 

individually and in their official 

capacity(ies} et al., 

Defendants-Appellees. 

} 

} 

} 

} 

} No. 89-2038 

} (D.C. No. 86-1440JC) 

} (D. N.M.} 

} 

} 

} 

) 

} 

} 

} 

} 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

Before LOGAN, MOORE, and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges. 

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. 

submitted without oral argument. 

The case is therefore ordered 

By this civil rights 

constitutional rights have 

action, 

been 

plaintiff 

violated 

alleged his 

by defendants' 

* 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: 89-2038 Document: 01019970793 Date Filed: 04/04/1990 Page: 1 
confiscation of some leg~l documents pertaining to cases of other 

inmates. It appears plaintiff's property was removed from his 

cell when plaintiff was placed in segregation for refusing to obey 

an order to move to a different housing unit. It further appears 

from documents either in the record or subsequently submitted to 

this court that some of the legal materials were returned to him 

and that some were placed in storage. 

Plaintiff does not claim that he has been denied access to 

the courts. Indeed, we take judicial notice that he has filed 

several appeals and original proceedings in this court alone over 

the years. Instead, plaintiff is essentially arguing that his 

right to practice as a jail-house lawyer on behalf of other 

unnamed inmates is being hindered. 

Under the circumstances, we agree with the district court 

that ·plaintiff has failed to demonstrate a constitutional 

violation. He is not the sole inmate capable of assisting other 

inmates. Further, it affirmatively appears that his placement in 

segregation was the result of his refusal to obey an order. It 

also appears that retention of other inmates' legal materials in a 

cell (as opposed to assisting other inmates in the law library) is 

unauthorized. 

Finally, plaintiff is not entitled to keep in storage an 

inordinate amount of property, legal or otherwise. See Mahler v. 

Slattery, 489 F. Supp. 798, 802-803 (E.D. Va. 1980). Plaintiff's 

correspondence with the warden suggests most of the legal papers 

were returned to him. If other inmates' legal actions have been 

compromised through no fault of their own, they will need to seek 

2 

Appellate Case: 89-2038 Document: 01019970793 Date Filed: 04/04/1990 Page: 2 
redress on their own behalf. For these and the reasons stated by 

the district court in its memorandum opinion and order, the 

district court's judgment is AFFIRMED. 

are denied. 

The mandate shall issue forthwith. 

All outstanding motions 

ENTERED FOR THE COURT 

PER CURIAM 

3 

Appellate Case: 89-2038 Document: 01019970793 Date Filed: 04/04/1990 Page: 3