P u rsuan t t o 5 T H C IR . R. 47. 5, t h e courtha s det erm i n ed that t h i s opi n i on * shou l d n otbe pu bl i shed an d i s not preceden texcept u n der t h e l i m i t ed c i r c um s t anc e s s e tf

o r t h i n 5 T H C IR . R. 47. 5. 4. 

### INTHE UNI TED S TATESCOU RT OFAPPEALS

FORTHEFIFTH CIRCU IT

N o. 08- 50694 Su m m ar y Cal endar

W I LL IAM CHARL ES T URNER Pl ai nt i f f

- Appe l l ant

v. DOUG DR ET KE ; AL T ON D C AS KE Y ; E X I QUI O G AR Z A; KE NNET H DE AN; GROUN DS, W a r d e n ; NATHANI EL QUARTE RM AN, DI RECT OR, T EXAS DE P AR T M ENT OFCRI M I NALJ US T I CE , C OR RE CT I ONA L I NS T I T UT I ONS DI VI S I ON; J EF FR EY C M ANSKE D efen da n t s- A pp el l ees

A pp ealf

rom t h e U n i t ed S t ates D i st ri ctC ou rt f or th e W est ernD i st ri ctof T exas U SD C N o. 6: 06- C V

- 133

B e fo r e D AV IS , G A R Z A , a n dP R A D O , C ir c u it J u d g e s . P E R C U R IA M: * W i l l i am C h arl es Tu rner, T exas pri soner # 389 529 , m oves f or perm i ssi on t o proceed i n f

orm a pa u peri s (IFP ) t o ap p e a l the den i alof hi s m ot i on f

or p r e lim in a r yinju n c tio n . In th a t m o tio n , T u r n e r s o u g h t t o co m p e l p r is o n o ffic ia ls t o c o m ply w i t h hi s di e t ar y r e s t r i c t i o ns , al l e ge dly ne c e s s i t at e d bybo t h hi s pe anut United States Court of App eals

Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D May 6, 2009 Cha rl es R. F ulb ru g e II I ClerkN o. 08- 50694

2 a lle r g ya n dre lig io u s p r a c tic e s . B ym o v in gfo rle a v e t o p r o c e e dIF P , T u r n e ris cha l l en gi n g t h e di st ri ctcourt ’ s cert i f i cat i on tha th i s ap pea lis n ott ak en i n good fa ith
. S ee B augh v. T aylor , 1 1 7 F .3d 1 9 7 , 2 0 2 (5t h C ir. 1 9 9 7 ). Am ovantf

or a pre l i m i nary i nj unct i on m ustdem ons t r at e ( 1) a s ubst ant i al l i ke l iho o d o f

s uc c e s s o n t he m e r i t s , ( 2) as ubs t ant i alt hr e att hatfail ur e t o g r ant t h e i nj u n ct i on w i l lres u l ti n i rreparabl e i nj u ry, (3) th at th e t h reat en ed i nj u ry o ut w e i ghs any da m ag e t hatt he i nj unc t i o n w i l lc aus e t o t he a dv e r s e pa r t y, a nd (4) th a t th e i nj u n cti on w i l l n ot h a ve a n a d ve rse eff ect on th e pu b l ic in te rest. L ak edream s v. T

aylor , 9 3 2 F .2 d1 1 0 3 , 1 1 0 7 (5 th C ir . 1 9 9 1 ). Tu r ner ar gues t hat h i s i nj u ri es from th e i n a d eq u a te m ea l s ar e irrep a ra b l e b eca u se th eycon sti tu te
v io la tio n s o f h is F ir s t a n d E ig h th A m e n d m e n t rig h ts a n d a ffe c t h is h e a lth
. W e h ave p revi ou sly h el d, how ever, t h at “pri sons n eed n otres pon d to pa rt i cul ari zed reli giou s d i eta ryreq u ests to com p l y w i th the F i rst A m en d m en t. ” B aranow s ki
v. Hart , 4 8 6 F .3 d1 1 2 , 1 2 2 (5 th C ir .), cer t
. den i ed , 1 2 8 S

. C t. 7 0 7 (20 0 7 ). Addi t i o nall y, Tur ne r ’ s b r i e f i s dev o i d of

l e ga la r gum e ntde m o ns t r at i ng t hatt he p r is o n ’ s p o lic yto n o t a d h e r e to s p e c ia l d ie ta r yn e e d s d u r i n glo c k d o w n is
u n r e a s o n a b le , a n dh e h a s th e r e fo r e w a iv e dre v ie w o f th a t is s u e . S ee Bri nkm ann v. D allas Cou n ty D epu ty S h erif f A bn er , 81 3 F
. 2 d74 4 , 74 8 ( 5 th C i r. 19 8 7 ). In l i gh t of B a r anow s ki , T u rner’ s i n ad equ ate bri ef i n g, an d the l ack of evi den ce suppor t i ng Tur ne r ’ s a ll e g a ti o ns o f physi c ali nj ury, Tu r nerhas fai l ed t o s how t hat t h e al l egati on of

i rreparabl e i nj u ry ha s argua bl e m eritw i t h regard t o hi s Fir st A me n d me n tf

r e e - e x e r c i s e c l a i m. W i t h regard t o hi s E i gh t h A m en dm en tcl ai m , “ [t] h e dep rivati on of f ood constit ut e s c r ue la nd u nus ualpun i s hm e nto nl y i f i tde ni e s apr i s o ne rt he
m i n i m a lcivil i ze dm ea su re of life’ s n ece ssit i es.” T ali b v. G i l ley , 138 F. 3d 211, 214
n . 3 ( 5th C i r. 199 8) (i n t erna lqu ot ati on m arks an d ci t ati on om i t t ed). “W h et h er t he de pr iva t i o n o f

f o o d fall s b e l o w t hi s t hr e s hol d de pe nds o n t he a m o unta nd d u ra ti on of th e d ep riva ti on . ” I d. N e it he rTur ne r ’ s fac t uala l l e ga t i o ns no rt he evi den ce a d d u ced i n sup port of hi s r equ estf

or i nj u n ct ive rel i ef

evi n ces aN o. 08- 50694

3 c o n t i n u o u s d e p r iv a t i o n o f f o o d f o r a n y p e r i o d m u c h l e s s a l e n g t h ype r i o d. C o n s e q u e n tly , T u r n e rh a s n o t s h o w n th a t h e h a s b e e n d e p r iv e dlife ’ s b a s ic
n ecess i t i es and ha s t h eref ore s h ow n nei t h er t h e t h reat of i rreparabl e ha rm nor a s u b s t a n t i a l l i k e l ih o o d o f s u c c e s s o n t h e me r i t s o f h i s E i g h t h A me n d me n tc l a i m. A s T u r n e rh a s n o t s h o w n t h a t th e d is tr ic t c o u r t’s d e te r m in a tio n th a t h is
a p p e a l w o u ldb e fr iv o l o u s i s i n c o r r e c t, h is re q u e s t fo rIF P is d e n ie d , a n dh is
a p p e a l is d is m is s e da s fr iv o lo u s . Se eBa ugh , 1 1 7 F .3 da t 2 0 2 n .2 4 ; 5 T H C IR . R. 4 2
. 2
. T h e d i s m i s s a lo f t h i s a p p e a lc o unt s a s o n e s t r i k e u n d e r2 8 U. S

. C. § 1 9 1 5 (g). S ee Ade

pegb a v . Ham m o ns , 1 0 3 F .3 d3 8 3 , 3 8 8 (5 th C ir . 1 9 9 6 ). W e no t e t hatTur ne rha s a l r e ad y ac c um ul at e d o ne s t r i ke i n Tur ne rv . Mo o ney ham , N o. 07-10517 ( 5th C i r. F eb. 20, 20 0 8 ) (u n pu bl i shed )

. Tu rner i s t h eref ore c a ut i o ne dt ha tif

h e a c c um ul a t e s t hr e e s t r i ke s , he wi ll no t b e a b l e t o p r o c e e dI FP i n a ny c ivi la ct i on or ap pe alf i l e d whi l e hei s i nc ar c e r at e d o rde t ai ne d i n a ny fa c ilityu n le s s h e is u n d e rim m in e n td a n g e ro f s e r io u s p h y s ic a l inju r y . S ee § 1 915( g) I F P DE NI ED ; A P P EA L DI S M I S S ED ; S ANC T I ON WARNI NG I S S UED
.