FILED U.S. COURT OF AP P EALS E LEVEN T HC IRC UIT OCTOB ER 20 , 2005 THOMAS K. KAH

N CLERK [ DO NO T P UB L I S H] I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 04- 16594 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D . C . D o c k e tN o . 0 0 - 1 4 3 3 7 - C V - K MM C H A R L E S R O B E R T B A K E R , P la in tif f - A p p e lla n t, v ersu s E V E R E T T R E X R O A D , S T E V E P A R K E R , R A Y M O N D S N E L L , D e f e n d a n ts - A p p e lle e s .

________________________ A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f orthe S outhe rn D i s tr i c tof F l or i da

_________________________ ( O c t ob e r 20, 2005) B efo re T JO F L A T , D U B IN A an d W IL S O N , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M:B aker w a s sentenc e d to30da ys in dis c ipl ina

ry c on finement a

nd los t 60da

ys o f g ain 1 time as a re sult of his conviction of the cha rg e in the disciplinary

repor t. Although the conviction was subse quently overturne d and B aker ’s g ain time restore d, he had already serve d 30da ys in dis c ipl ina

ry c on finement. 2 C ha r l e s R . B a ke r , apr i s one rpr oc e e di ng p ro se , ap p ea ls th e d istrict co u rt’s o rd er g ran t i n g d efen d an t s S t ev e P ark er’ s an d R aym o n d S n el l ’ s m o t i o n t o d i sm i ss B a k e r ’s c iv il r ig h ts a c tio n , f ile d p u r s u a n t to 4 2 U .S .C . § 1 9 8 3 , b e c au s e it f a ile d to s t a t e ac l a i m . A ddi t i ona l l y , B a ke rappe a l s the di s tr i c tc ourt ’ s or de rgr a nt i ng d efen d an tE v erettR ex ro ad ’ s m o t i o n fo r su m m ary j u d g m en t . B ak er al l eg ed i n h i s § 1983 c om pl a i nttha t( 1) R e xr oa d, w orki ng a s ahe a r i ng of f i c e ri n the de t e nt i on f a c ilityw h e r e B a k e rw a s c o n f in e d , v io la te d h is du e p r o c e s s r ig h ts b yd e n y in g h is r e q u e s t to c a ll aw itn e s s a t ap r is o n d is c ip lin a ryh e a r in g a n d b yf in d in g h im g u ilty of di s obe y i ng a n or de rt o c l e a n hi s pr i s on c e l l ; a nd tha t( 2) P a rke r , ac orr e c t i ons o ffi cer, an d S n el l , th e p ri so n ’ s assi st an tsu p eri n t en d en t , v i o l at ed h i s d u e p ro cess ri g h t s b y fai l i n g t o t ak e co rrect i v e act i o n d u ri n g th e ad m i n i strat i v e ap p eal s p ro cess. O n ap p e a l, B a k e ra r g u e s th a t th e f a ilu r e o f b o th P a rk e ra n d S n e ll to i n v est i g at e an d rev i ew h i s cl ai m s d u ri n g th e ad m i n i strat i v e ap p eal s p ro cess depri ved h i m of hi s c on st i tut i on al ri gh t s, gi vi ng ri se t o an act i on abl e c l ai m un der 4 2 U .S .C . § 1 9 8 3 . B a k e rth e r e f o r e c o n te n d s th a t h is c o m p la in t w a s s u f f ic ie n t to 1 s ta te ac la im a lle g in g ad e n ia l o f d u e p r o c e s s a n d th a t th e d is tr ic t c o u rt im p r o p e r ly d is m is s e d h is c la im w ith r e s p e c t to P a rk e ra n d S n e ll.3

W e r evi ew a grantof a m ot i on t o d i sm i ss un der F ed. R . C i v. P . 12 (b)( 6) de no vo , ap p ly in g th e s a m e s ta n d a r d a s th e d is tr ic t c o u rt. H of f m an -P ug h v. R am se

y , 3 1 2 F . 3 d 1 2 2 2 , 1 2 2 5 (1 1 th C i r. 2 0 0 2 ). In rev i ew i n g th e co m p l ai n t , w e “ m u st a c c e p t th e w e ll p le a d e d f a c ts a s tru e a n d r e s o lv e th e m in th e lig h t m o s t f a v o r ab le to the pl ai nt i ff

. ” B e c k v . D e loi t te & T

ouc he , 144 F . 3d 732, 735 ( 11th C i r . 1998) ( q u o ta tio n o m itte d ) . “[ A ] c o m p la in t s h o u ld n o t b e d is m is s e d [ p u r s u a n t to R u le 12( b) ( 6) ] f

orf a i l ur e t o s t a t e ac l a i m unl e s s i tappe a r s be y ond doubttha tthe p la in tif f c a n p r o v e n o s e t o f

f a c ts in s u p p o rt o f

h is c la im w h ic h w o u ld e n title h im t o rel i ef . ” C onle yv . G i bs on , 35 5 U . S . 41 , 45 -46 (19 57 ). H e r e , B a ke rc l a i m s tha tP a rke ra nd S ne l l de ni e d hi m due pr oc e s s by f a i l i ng t o t ake c orre ct i ve ac t i on du ri ng the appeal of hi s di sc i pl i naryconv i ct i on . In order t o p re vai l , ho w ever , B akerm ustfi rs tdem on stra t e thatthe i nm at e gri evance p r o c e d u r e p r o v i d e d h i m wi th ac o n s t i tu t i o n a l l yp r o t e c t e d i n t e r e s t . Al th o u g h we have no tye tconsi dere d thi s i ss ue, w e a gree w i th o ther c i rc ui t s thathave hel d that th e s e p r o c e e d in g s a r e n o t c o n s titu tio n a llym a n d a te d . See A da m s v . R i ce , 40 F . 3d 7 2 , 7 5 ( 4 th C ir . 1 9 9 4 ) ( h o ld in g th a t “th e C o n s titu tio n c r e a te s n o e n title m e n t to g ri ev an ce p ro ced u res o r access to an y su ch p ro ced u re v o l u n t ari l y est ab l i sh ed b y a s ta te ” ) ; B uc kle

yv . B ar low , 997 F . 2d 494, 495 ( 8th C i r . 1993) ( pe rc ur i a m ) ( hol di ng tha tas t a t e - c r e a t e d pr i s on gr i e va nc e pr oc e dur e i s s i m pl yapr oc e dur a l r i ghta nd4

d o e s n o t c o n f

e ra n ys u b s ta n tiv e r ig h t u p o n a n in m a te ) ; Fl i c k v . A lba , 932 F . 2d 728, 729 ( 8th C i r . 1991) ( pe rc ur i a m ) ( hol di ng tha tf e de r a l pr i s on a dm i ni s tr a t i ve r e m e dy procedures “ do no ti n and of them se l ves c re at e al i berty i nt er es ti n acc es s t o that p r o c e d u r e ,” a n d th a t “th e p r is o n e r ’s r ig h t to p e titio n th e g o v e rn m e n t f o rr e d r e s s is the ri gh tof ac ce ss t o the court s, w hi ch i s notcom prom i se d b y the pri son’ s r ef usal to e n te rta in h is g r ie v a n c e ” ) ; Ma n n v . A da ms , 855 F . 2d 639, 640 ( 9th C i r . 1988) (hol di ng that“ [t ] here i s no l egi t i m at e c l ai m of ent i t l em entt o a gri evance p r o c e d u r e ” ) . B e c aus e the f

a i l ur e of P a rke ra nd S ne l l t o t a ke c orr e c t i ve a c t i on upon the f i l i ng of B a ke r ’ s a dm i ni s tr a t i ve appe a l a tthe i ns t i tut i ona l l e ve l di d nota m ountt o a v io la tio n o f

d u e p r o c e s s , th e d is tr ic t c o u rt p r o p e r lyd e te rm in e d th a t B a k e rf a ile d to s ta te ac la im u n d e r§ 1 9 8 3 w ith r e s p e c t to P a rk e ra n d S n e ll. B a ke rne xta r gue s tha tthe di s tr i c tc ourte rr e d i n gr a nt i ng de f e nda nt R e xr oa d’ s m ot i on f

ors um m a ryj udgm e nt . W e r e vi e w the di s tr i c tc ourt ’ s gr a ntof s u m m a ryju d g m e n t de no vo , appl y i ng the s a m e s t a nda r d a s the di s tr i c tc ourta nd v ie w in g a ll e v id e n c e a n d f a c tu a l in f

e r e n c e s r e a s o n ab lyd r a w n f r o m th e e v id e n c e in th e lig h t m o s t f

a v o r ab le to th e n o n - m o v in g p a rty . Se e B ur ton v . T am pa H ous i ng A uth. , 271 F . 3d 1274, 1276- 77 ( 11th C i r . 2001) ( c i t a t i ons om i tt e d) . “ A gr a ntof sum m ary j ud gm entm aybe up hel d o n any basi s s up po rt ed by the re cord. ” Id . at5

1 2 7 7 . S u m m a ryju d g m e n t is ap p r o p r ia te “if th e p le a d in g s , d e p o s itio n s , a n s w e r s to i nt e rr oga t or i e s , a nd a dm i s s i ons on f i l e , t oge the rw i th the a f

f i da vi t s , i f

a ny , s how th a t th e r e is n o g e n u in e is s u e a s to a n ym a te r ia l f a c t a n d th a t th e m o v in g p a rtyis ent i t l ed t o j ud gm entas a m att erof l aw . ” F e d . R . C iv . P . 5 6 ( c ) . W e have i dent i fi ed tw o si tuat i on s i n w hi ch a pri soner, w ho has a l re ady bee n d e p r iv e d o f

lib e rtyin th e tr a d itio n a l s e n s e , c a n b e f u rth e rd e p r iv e d o f

h is lib e rty su ch th at d u e p ro ce ss is re q u ired . “ T h e f irst is w h en a c h an g e in th e p riso n er ’s cond i t i on s of c on fi nem enti s s o sever e thati tes se nt i al l y e xcee ds the se nt ence im p o s e d b yth e c o u rt. T h e s e c o n d s itu a tio n is w h e n th e s ta te h a s c o n s is te n tly be s t ow e d ac e rt a i n be ne f i tt o pr i s one r s , us ua l l ythr ough s t a tut e ora dm i ni s tr a t i ve p o lic y , a n d th e d e p r iv a tio n o f th a t b e n e f

it im p o s e s a typ ic a l a n ds ig n if ic a n t h a r d s h ip on the i nm at e i n rel at i on t o the ordi naryi nci dent s of pri son l i fe . ” Ki rby v . Si ege lm an , 19 5 F . 3d 12 85 , 12 90 -91 (11 th C i r. 19 99 ) ( per c uri am ) ( i nt ernal ci t at i on s and qu ot at i on s om i tt ed). H ow ever , even i f apri soner i s f urther depri ved of hi s l i berty, thu s r equi ri ng du e proces s, i ti s w el l es t abl i shed that“ the st at e m ay cure a proceduraldepri vat i on by prov i di ng a l at erprocedural re m edy; on l y w hen the st at e r ef

uses t o p rovi de a proces s s uffi ci entt o rem edy the procedural depri vat i on do es a c on st i tut i on al vi ol at i on ac t i on abl e und erse ct i on 19 83 ar i se . ” McKin n e yv . P a te , 20 F . 3d 15 50 , 15 57 (11th C i r. 19 94 ) ( e n banc ).6

H e r e , B a ke rw a s gi ve n w r i tt e n not i c e of the c ha r ge s a nd aw r i tt e n s t a t e m e nt o f th e r e a s o n s f

o rth e d is c ip lin a rya c tio n . H e w a s n o t a f f o r d e d th e o p p o rtu n ityto ca l l a w i tness du ri ng the di sc i pl i naryhear i ng , bu tthi s i s i rr el evant . T he re cord s h o w s th a t B a k e rh a d th e b e n e f it o f af u ll ap p e a ls p r o c e s s , w h ic h h e r e p e a te d ly used. M oreover, hi s c on vi ct i on w as subsequent l y overturned, hi s di sc i pl i nary re cord expu ng ed, and h i s 60 d ay s of gai n t i m e r es t ored. T here fore , i f i n fac tthere w a s ap r o c e d u r a l d e p r iv a tio n , th e e rr o rw a s c u r e d b yth e in s titu tio n a l ap p e a ls p r o c e s s . See M

cKi nn ey , 20 F . 3d a t1557. B a s e d on ac a r e f

ul r e vi e w of

the r e c or d, a s w e l l a s the pa rt i e s ’ r e s pe c t i ve b r ie f s , w e d is c e rn n o r e v e r s ib le e rr o r . B e c au s e th e d is tr ic t c o u rt d id n o t e rrin di s m i s s i ng B a ke r ’ s c l a i m a ga i ns tde f e nda nt s S ne l l a nd P a rke rori n gr a nt i ng d e f e n d a n tRe x r o a d ’ s mo t i o n f o rs u mma ryj u d g me n t , w e a f f i rm. AF F I RME D.