Pursuant to 5 T H C IR . R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinionshould not * be publishe d and is not precedent except under the limited circu mstance s set forth in 5 T H C IR . R. 47.5 .4. 

### INTHE UNI TED S TATESCOU RT OFAPPEALS

FORTHE FIFTH CIRCU IT

N o. 07- 60375 Su m m ar yC al endar

W I L L IAM T B US I CK Pl ai nt i f f

- Appe l l ant

v.
J OHN NE AL ; E AVE RYR OL L I NS ; BR END A P ER RY ; MRS C HAR L ES E S CO ; CHU CK M CNEAL ; T OBYT R OWB R I DG E ; AR T HURT HO MP S ON; M RS F RED ES CO; CLI NT KI NER; JANI KA M EOS HA CHEERS ; J OH N A EM FR EY; M EL CO XW ELL 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 fo rth e S o u th e r n D is tr ic t o f M is s is s ip p i U SD C N o. 3: 02- C V

- 483

B ef ore JO L LY , W IE N E R , an d E L R O D , C i rcui tJu dg es. P E R C U R IA M: * W i l l i am T

. B u si ck, M i ssi ssi pp ipri soner # 840 27, b rough tthis civi lact i on p u rsu a n t t o 4 2 U

. S

. C

. § 19 8 3 , as w ellas o th er fed era lan ds ta te l a w , ag a i n st: ( 1) t h e C i tyo f M a d ison, M i ssi ssi pp i , an d si x m em bers of t h e M ad i son P ol i ce D epa rt m en t , C h i ef

of P ol i ce G en e W al dru p, L i eu t en a n t E ri c C

. P al m er, Li e ut e nantCat he r i ne Ree s e , I nve s t i ga t o rM i ke B r o w n, O f f i c e rSt e phe n Pat r i c k, United States Court of App eals

Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D May 26, 2010 Lyle W . Cayce Clerk Case: 07-60375 Document: 00511122897 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/26/2010N o. 07- 60375

2 a n dO ffic e rP a u l B u n c h (th e M a d is o n C ity D e fe n d a n ts ); (2 ) S p e c ia l A g e n t D a v id S cot tD u f

ou r and Sp eci alA gen tE

. Avery R ol l i n s of t h e F ed e ra l B u reau of Investi gati on ; ( 3) L i eu t en an tD avid W

. R u t h an d D et ect ive Jef f N

. R obert son of th e B ra n d o n , M is s iss ip p i, P o li ce D e p a rtm e n t (th e B ra n d o n D e fen d a n ts); (4) D etective J oh n N ea lof th e R i d ge la n d , M i ssissi p p i , P oli ce D ep a rtm en t; ( 5) M ad i son C ou n t y, M i ssi ssi pp i , Sh erif f T o by T row bri dg e, Jr. , an d seven
m em b ers o f th e M a d i son C ou n ty S h erif f’ s D ep a rtm en t, M a d i son C ou n ty D et en t i on C en t er A dm i n i st rat or Jed W o m a ck , M ad i son C ou n t y D et en t i on Cent e rW a r d e n Ar t hurTho m ps o n, D e put y She r i f f J i m Fr az i e r , Li e ut e nantCl i nt K i ne r , Li e ut e nantBr e ndaPe r r y, M ailH and l e rM r s . Char l e s Esc o , a nd Bo o ki ng Of f i c e rJ a n i k aMe o s h aC h e e r s (t h e Ma d i s o n C o u n t yDe fe n d a n t s ) ; a n d( 6 ) A DA E m f rey an d A D AC oxw el l

. B u si ck ap pea l s t h e di st ri ctcourt ’ s di sm i ssalof som e of h is cla im s an d the m agis t rat e j u dg e’ s di sm i ssalan d gran tof sum m ary j u dg m en ton the rem ai n der of hi s c l ai m s. B u s i c ka r g u e s t h a tt h e m a g i s t r a t e j u d g e e r r e db yd i s mi s s i n gh i s c l a i ms aga i n stD et ectiv e N e al

. H e m ai n t ai n s t h at he st ated a vi able cl ai m against D e t e c t ive N e alf

o rm ali c i o us pr o s e c ut i o n b as e d up o n Det e c t ive N e al ’ s c har gi ng h i m w i t h cr edi tcard fr au d an d fal sely t est i f yi n g at a p rel i m i n ary h eari n g af t er D e te c tiv e N e a l p r o m is e d th a t h e w o u ld n o t b e c h a r g e dw ith cr e d it c a r dfr a u dif he ga ve D e t e c t ive N e al i nf o r m at i o n ab o ut ano t he rs us pe c t
. H e c o nt e nds t hatt he
m al i c i ou s pro se c ut i on c l ai m i s notbar r ed by Heck v. Hu mph rey , 512 U

. S. 477 ( 1 9 9 4 ) , b e c a u s e t h e c r e d i t c a r d f r a u d c h a r g e wa s n o l l e p r o s s e d

. He m ai nt ai ns t hathe w as har m ed byD etec t ive N eal ’ s ac t i ons be c ause t he addi t i onalc harge
a g a in s t h im ca u s e d h im to b e h e ldo n e x c e s s iv e b a il. H e a s s e r ts th a t t h e cr e d it
c ar d f r aud char ge agai nsth i m som ehow cause d h i m to be s ubj ec t ed t o e xc es sive f o r c e w hi l e i n t he c us t o dy o f t he M i s s i s s i ppi D e pa r t m e nt o f Cor r e c t i o ns f

o l l o w i ng h is co n v ic tio n o n as e p a r a te b u r g la r ych a r g e . H e fu r th e ra r g u e s th a t h is
a ll e g a t i o ns a g a i ns tDe t e c t iv e Nea ls e tf o r t h av i a b l e c l a i m u nd e rM i s s i s s ip p il a w. F or t h e f

i rstt i m e on ap pea l , B u si ck contend s t h at hi s al l egati on s ag a in st Case: 07-60375 Document: 00511122897 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/26/2010N o. 07- 60375

3 D e t e c t ive N e al s t at e d a vi ab l e r e t ali at i o n c l ai m be c aus e D e t e c t ive N e alb r o ugh t t h e cr edi tcard f

rau d cha rge againsthi m onl yb e ca u se of h i s c ivi ll i t i gati on aga i n stot h er l aw enfor cem en tof f i cers . B usi c k ac know l edg es th a tt he c r edi tc ar d f r aud char ge agai nsthi m w as
n ol l e prossed; accor di n gl y, t h e st atem en the m ad e t o D et ect ive N ealw as not
us e d a ga i nsthi m a tt r i al , a nd Bus i c k t hus c anno tr ai s e aFi f t h Am e ndm e nt
c la im a g a in s t D e te c tiv e N e a l fo rm a k in ga n u n k e p t p r o m is e o f le n ie n c y . S ee Mu rr ay v . Ea rle , 4 0 5 F .3 d2 7 8 , 2 8 5 n .1 1 ( 5 t h C ir . 2 0 0 5 ). F u r t h e r m o r e , B u s ic k ’s al l egati on s agai n stD et ect ive N ealdo n otshock the consci en ce and cann ot
s upp o r taFo ur t e e nt h Am e n dm en tc l ai m ; a c c e pt i ng Busi c k’ s a l l e ga t i o ns a nd
av e r m e nt s a s t r ue , D e t e c t ive N e al ’ s b r o ke n pr o m i s e r e s ul t e d o nl y i n t he r e b e i ng a c r e di t c ar d f

r audc har ge pe ndi ng ag ai ns tBus i c k f o rat i m e w hi l e he w as b e i ng h e ldo n o th e rch a r g e s a n dth e n b e in gd is m is s e d

. S ee St o ke s v . G ann , 498 F. 3d 483, 485 ( 5t h C i r. 2007)

. To t he e xt entt hatB usi c k s oughtt o r ai sea g ener al
m a lic io u s p r o s e c u tio n cla i m i n d e p e n d e n t fr o m acla im b a s e du p o n as p e c ific
c o n s tit u tio n a l a m e n d m e n t, n o s u c h fe d e r a l la w cla im e x is ts
. SeeCast e l lano v. Fragozo , 3 5 2 F .3d 9 3 9 , 9 4 9 -6 1 (5t h C ir. 2 0 0 3 ) ( e n b a n c). W h i l e B u si ck n ot es t h at bai lw as seton th e c re d it card f rau d cha rge, Busi c k’ s a l l e ga t i o ns s ho w t hathe w as al s o be i ng he l d on a bur gl ar y c har ge a nd l at e r a bur gl ar y c o nvi c t i o n dur i ng t he e nt i r e t i m e t hat t he c r e di t c ar d f ra ud cha rge w as pen di n g. A s t h e cr edi t card f rau d cha rge w as di sm i ssed an d B u si ck
w as not ever detai n ed on tha tch arge, B u si ck di d n otal l ege t h at he w as dam aged byD e t e c t ive N e al ’ s a c t i o ns , a n d , th e r e f o r e , hi s M i s s i s s i ppil aw c l ai m o f m ali c i o us p r o s e c u tio n fa ile dto s ta te a c la im u p o n w h ic h re lie f m a yb e g r a n te d

. SeeTebo
v. Tebo , 5 5 0 F .3d 4 9 2 , 4 9 8 -9 9 (5t h C ir. 2 0 0 8 ). W hi l e Bus i c k a r gue s i n t hi s c o ur tthatD e t e c t i ve N e ali ni t i at e d t he p r o s e c u tio n o f th e c r e d it ca r d fr a u dch a r g e a g a in s t h im in re ta lia tio n fo rh is civ il l i t i gati on againstot h er l aw enfor cem en t of f i cers , h e di d not rai se t h i s r et al i ati on c la im in d is tr ic t c o u r t. A s t h i s c l a im w a s n o t r a is e din th e d is tr ic t c o u r t, it Case: 07-60375 Document: 00511122897 Page: 3 Date Filed: 05/26/2010N o. 07- 60375

4 c a n n o t b e c o n s id e r e do n a p p e a l. S ee L everet t e v. L ou i svi l le La d d er Co. , 183 F. 3d 3 3 9 , 3 4 2 (5t h C ir. 1 9 9 9 ). B u si ck argu es t h at t h e m agis t rat e j u dg e erred by grantin gsum m ary ju d g m e n t on h is c la im s th a t th e M a d is o n C o u n ty D e fe n d a n ts v io la t e d h is
c o n s tit u tio n a l rig h ts b yd e n y in gh im a c c e s s t o t h e c o u r ts
. H e m a in ta in s th a t h is
access t o t h e courts w as den i ed because h e w as al l ow ed to u se t h e l egal l ibrary att he M adi so n C ount y D et ent i on C ent eronl y once for30 m i nute s duri ng t he 11
m on t h s he w as i n carcer ated at t h at faci l i t y. H e contends that h i s l ack of acces s t o t he l aw l ibr ar y pr ej udi c e d hi m i n t hr e e c ivils ui t s i n t he di s t r i c tc o ur t : t he p r e s e n t c a s e ; B u si ck v. C i ty of Mag ee , N o . 3: 00

- CV

- 32 7; a nd Busi c k v . Lam ar Cou n ty , No

. 2 : 0 2

- C V

- 9 0
. H e a s s e r t s t h a th e w o u l dh a v e ma i n t a i n e dc l a i ms ag ai ns tc e r t ai n de fe nda nt s i n C i ty of Mag ee i f he had ac c es s t o the l aw l ibr ar y, t h at hi s l ack of

acces s t o t h e l aw l ibrary regardi n g t h e L a m a r Co u n tycase
s o m e h o w ca u s e d t h e M is s is s ip p i D e p a r tm e n t o f C o r r e c tio n s to s u b s e q u e n tly cha n ge h is tim e s h e et s t o show t h at he i s s ervi n g a 25

- year sentence as a h a b itu a l o ffe n d e r , a n dth a t h is la c ko f a c c e s s t o th e la w lib r a r yp r e v e n te dh im f r o m pr e va i l i ng o n hi s c l ai m s a gains tSpe c i alAge ntD uf o ur , Spe c i alAge nt Rol l i ns , t he Ci t y o f

M ad i s o n D e fe nda nt s , t he Ci t y o f Br and o n Defe nda nt s , a nd D epu t y S h erif

f F razi er i n t h e present c ase. For t h e f i rstt i m e on ap pea l , B u si ck
ar gues t hatt he M adi so n C ount y D ef endant s deni ed hi m acc es s t o the c our t s by d e n y in gh im p r o p e rm e d ic a tio n , w h ic h p r eju d ic e dh is s e lf-r e p r e s e n ta tio n a t h is crim i n a lbu rg l a rytri a l

. H e con ten d s th a t t h e a cti on s of t h e M a d i son C ou n ty D efen da n t s vi ol ated both t h e federalan d st ate c on st i t u t i on s. B u si ck al l egedt h at h e w as incarcer ated in t h e M ad i son C ou n t y D et en t i on Cent e rf

r o m J anua r y 18 , 2 00 2, unt i lO c t o be r2 a s apret r i alde t ai ne e a nd
r e m a in e da t t h e M a d is o n C o u n tyD e te n tio n C e n te ra fte rh is co n v ic tio n u n til D ecem ber 15, 200 2. B u si ck vol u n t ari l y di sm i ssed t h e Ci tyof Mag eecase on A pri l25, 200 1. W h il e in ca rcer ated at t h e M ad i son C ou n t y D et en t i on C en t er, Busi c k f i l e d am o t i o n t o v ac at e t he or de rgr ant i ng t he v o l unt ar y di s m i s s al

. The Case: 07-60375 Document: 00511122897 Page: 4 Date Filed: 05/26/2010N o. 07- 60375

5 d is t r ic tc o u r tg r a n t e dth e m o t io n , b u titin v o lu n t a r i lyd is m is s e dB u s ic k ’s
c om p l a i n t i n t hatc as e o n A pril24, 2002. Bu si c k s t at es t hathe w oul d have proceededf

u rt h er i n t h at c ase i f he h adacces s t o the l aw l ibrary, bu the d oes not exp l ai n how he w ou l d h ave p roceeded, w h at cl ai m s h e w ou l d h ave rai sed, or h ow t hos e c l ai m s w ere m eri t or i ous . As B usi c k has notdem ons t r at ed t hathe w as pr e ve nt e d f

r o m r ai s i ng a n on f

r ivo l o us l e ga lc l ai m i n C i ty of Mag ee , he h as not show n th e exi st en ce of a vi able den i alof

acces s to the courts cl ai m i n conj u n ct i on
w ith th a t c a s e . S ee L ew i s v. Casey , 5 1 8 U .S

. 3 4 3 , 3 5 1 (19 9 6 ). B u si ck f

i l ed h i s c om pla in t in t h e L a m a r Co u n tyc as e o n A pril8, 2002,
w h i l e h e w as i n carcer ated at t h e M ad i son C ou n t y D et en t i on C e n te r. B u si ck
s u b s e q u e n tlyfile ds o m a n y a m e n d e d c o m p la in ts , a tt a c h m e n ts , a n dm o tio n s in th a t c a s e th a t o n A u g u s t 2 7 , 2 0 0 2 , th e m a g is tr a te ju d g e o r d e r e dth a t h e n o t file
an y f u rt h er pl ead i n gs w i t h t h e courtun t ilf u rt h er or de r. T h a t case proceeded
u n t i li tw as di sm i ssed on B u si ck’ s o ra l m ot i on on A pri l14, 200 3, w el laf t er Bu s i c kwa s n o l o n g e ri n c a r c e r a t e da tt h e M a d i s o n Co u n t yD e t e n t i o n Ce n t e r . As t h i s c ase w as not di sm i ssed un t i lw el laf t er B u si ck w as n o l on ger i n carcer ated att he M ad i s o n County D e t e nt i o n Cent e r , Bus i c k ha s no ts ho w n t hatt he a c t i o ns o f t he M ad i s o n C o unt y D e fe nda nt s pr e ve nt e d hi m f r o m r ai s i ng a no nf

r ivo l o us cl a i m i n t hi s c as e. As B usi c k has notdem ons t r at ed t hatt he M adi so n C oun ty D e fe n d a n ts ’a c tio n s p r e v e n te dh im fr o m ra is in gan o n fr i v o l o u s le g a l cla im in L a m a r Co u n ty , he ha s no ts ho w n t he e xi s t e nc e o f av i ab l e de ni al o f ac c e s s t o t he
c o u r ts cla im in co nju n c tio n w ith th a t c a s e . S eeL ew is , 518 U

. S. at351. B u sick’ s a sse rti on th a t th e acti on s of th e M a d i son C o u n ty D e fen d a n ts p reju d i ced h i s ab i l i ty to p rose cu te th e pre sen t civilaction i s also w i th ou t m erit. Busi c k’ s t hi r d a m e nde d c o m pl ai nt , t he c o m pl ai ntt hatw as c o ns i de r e d i n t he di st ri ctcourt , w as f

i l ed on Jan u ary 21, 200 5, years af t er B u si ck l ef

tthe M ad i son C ount y D et ent i on C ent er . W hi l e B usi c k al l ege s t hath i s l ac k of ac c es s t o the l aw l ib r a r y a t t h e M a d i son C ou n ty D eten ti on C en ter i n h ib i tedh i s ab i l i ty to
succ e s s f

ul l y pur s ue hi s c l ai m s a ga i ns tSpe c i alAge ntD uf o ur , Spe c i alAge nt Case: 07-60375 Document: 00511122897 Page: 5 Date Filed: 05/26/2010N o. 07- 60375

6 Rol l i ns , t he Ci t y o f

M ad i s o n Defe nda nt s , t he C i t y o f B r and o n Defe nda nt s , a nd D epu ty Sh er i f

f Fraz i er , t hos e c l ai m s w er e no tdi sm i ss ed unt i lSept em ber22, 200 5, al m ostt h ree years af t er B u si ck w as l ast i n carcer ated at t h e M ad i son C ou n t y D et en t i on C en t er. A s B u si ck h as n ot dem on st rat ed t h at th e M a d ison C ount y D ef

en d a n ts’ac t i ons pr eve nt ed hi m f r om r ai si ng a nonf

r ivol ous l egal cl ai m i n t h e present c ase, he h as not show n t h e exi st en ce of a vi able den ia l of
a c c e s s to th e co u r ts cla im in co nju n c tio n w ith th is ca s e . S eeL ew is , 518 U

. S. at 351. W h i l e B u sick arg u es i n th i s cou rt th a t th e M a d i son C ou n ty D efen d a n ts den i ed h i m access to th e court s by den yi n g h i m hi s proper m edi cat i on , B u si ck di d no tr ai s e t hi s c l ai m i n t he di s t r i c tc o ur t
. As t hi s c l ai m w as no tr ai s e d i n t he d is tr ic t c o u r t, it c a n n o t b e co n s id e r e do n a p p e a l. S eeL ev er ette , 183 F. 3d at342. To t he ext entt hatBus i c k a r gue s t hatt he di s t r i c tc o ur te r r e d b y gr ant i ng
s um m ar y j udg m e nto n hi s r e l at e d s t at e l aw c l ai m s , he has nei t he rcit e d t o a ny st ate l aw au t h ori t y n or provi ded a n y argu m en trega rdi n g st ate l aw . A s B u si ck h a s n o t s u ffic ie n tlyb r ie fe dh is s ta te l a w c l a i m s , th e ya r e d e e m e dw a iv e d

. S ee Yoheyv . Col l i ns , 9 8 5 F .2d 2 2 2 , 2 2 4 -2 5 (5t h C ir. 1 9 9 3 ). B u si ck argu es t h at th e m agis t rat e j u d g e erred bygran t i n g sum m ary ju d g m e n t o n h is cla im s th a t t h e M a d is o n C o u n tyD e fe n d a n ts w e r e d e lib e r a te ly i n di f ferent t o a ser i ou s r i sk of h arm to h i m b y fai l i n g t o p rot ecthi m f rom ot h er i nm at es . Bu si c k al l ege s t hatLt

. Perr y st oo d out si de hi s f our - m an c el lw hi l e a n i nm at e nam ed Van B ure n m ade am i xt ure of hum an feces a n d shavi ng c r eam a n dth r e w it o n h im t h r o u g h th e clo s e dd o o ro f h is in d iv id u a l ce ll, ca u s in ga c id bur ns . H e s t a t e s t ha t Lt

. Pe r r y d i d no t t e l l Van Bur e n t o s t o p a nd a s ke d V an B ure n t o l eavet he f

our - m an c el lonly aftert he at t ac k. Bu si c k m ai nt ai ns t hat th e s e fa c ts s h o w th a t L t. P e r r yw a s d e lib e r a te lyin d iffe r e n t t o h is s a fe ty
. B usi c k ar gues thatL t
. K i nerw as deliber at ely i ndi f fer entt o the r i sk t hat i nm at e PaulSm i t h, w ho a s s ault e d Bus i c k, po s e d t o hi s s af e t y w hi l e a tt he M a d is o n C o u n tyD e te n tio n C e n te r . H e s ta te s t h a t S m ith w a s re m o v e dfr o m h is Case: 07-60375 Document: 00511122897 Page: 6 Date Filed: 05/26/2010N o. 07- 60375

7 f our - m an c el l , butr et urned t o thatc el lpr i ort o t he ass aul t
. H e m ai nt ai ns t hat he t o l d Lt

. K i ne rpr i o rt o t he as s aultt hatSm i t h was at hr e att o hi m b e c aus e he
w o u ld n o t t e ll S m it h a b o u t h is le g a l a c t iv it ie s . B u s ic ks t a t e s th a ta ft e rS m it h ’s
as s aulto n hi m , Sm i t h was pl ac e d b ac k i n hi s f our - m an c e l la ga i n, de s pi t e t he fa c tt h a tt h e c e l lw a s ame d i c a lc e l la n d S mi t h h a dn o me d i c a ln e e d s . H e contend s t h at Sm i t h w as repe a te dl y pl aced i n hi s c el lt o gather i n f orm ati on abou thi s l egal act ivi t i es. W hi l e Bus i c k a ve r r e d t hatLt

. Pe r r y hadno t i c e t hatVan Bur e n ha d m ad e an unspec i f

i ed v erbalt hre atagai nsthi m , he di d not pre se nt any ev i denc e that L t
. P erry had kn ow l edg e t h at h e faced a sub st an t i al ri sk of ph ysi calha rm f rom V a n B u r e n . S ee L i t t le v. S pears , N o. 94-6082 8, 199 5 W L 313 938 at *2 ( 5th C i r. M a y2 , 1 9 9 5 ) (u n p u b l i s h e d); seealso 5 THC IR
. R

. 47. 5. 3. A dd i t i on al l y, B u si ck
ar guabl y c ont r adi c t ed hi s w r i t t en ave r m ent s ata hea r i ng w hen he t es t i f i ed t hat h e di d n otha ve an y probl em s w i t h V an B u ren bef ore the assau l ta n d ad m i t t ed t h at th e assaultm ay h ave been sp on t an eou s. W h i l e B u si ck argu es i n t h i s c ou rt th a t L t. P e r r yw itn e s s e dth e a s s a u lt b u t d id n o t in te rv e n e , h e d idn o t r a is e th is
c la im in th e d is tr ic t co u r t. A s th is cla im w a s n o t r a is e din th e d is tr ic t c o u r t, it
c a n n o t b e co n s id e r e do n a p p e a l. S eeL ev er ette , 1 8 3 F .3 d a t 3 4 2
. A s B u s ic k d id notpr es entev i denc e s how i ng t hatan y o f t he M adi so n C ount y D ef endant s had kn ow l edg e of

fact s s h ow i n g a sub st an t i alri sk of ser i ou s harm t o hi m presented by V an B u ren an d m ad e the i n ference tha ta substanti alri sk exi st ed, he h as not
s h o w n th a t t h e m a g is tr a te ju d g e e r r e d b y g r a n tin g s u m m a r yju d g m e n t o n th is
c la im

. Se eFar m e rv . Br e nnan , 5 1 1 U .S

. 8 2 5 , 8 3 7 (19 9 4 ). A l t hough B usi c k ave r r ed t hatLt

. K i nerhad know l edge of a v erbal al t ercat i on betw een B u si ck an d S m i t h t h e daybef ore th e assault , he d i d n ot pr e s e nta ny e vi de nc e t hatLt

. K i ne rha d k no w l e dg e t hatSm i t h pr e s e nt e d a
s u b s ta n tia l r is k o f p h y s ic a l h a r m to B u s ic k b e fo r e th e a s s a u lt. S eeL ittle , 1995 W L 313938 at*2

. Bu si c k’ s ave rm en t s t hatSm i t h w as pl ac ed i n hi s f our - m an cel lt o spy on hi s l egal act ivi t i e s w e re i n suff i ci en tt o defeat th e m ot i on f or Case: 07-60375 Document: 00511122897 Page: 7 Date Filed: 05/26/2010N o. 07- 60375

8 s um m ar y j udg m e ntb e c aus e “m ere c o nc l us o r y all e ga t i o ns a r e no tc o m pe t e nt
sum m ar y j udgm entev i denc e, and s uch al l egat i ons are i nsuf f i c i ent
. . . t o de feat
a m oti on for su m m a ryj u d gm en t. ” Ea s o n v . T h a le r, 73 F

. 3d132 2, 132 5 ( 5th C i r. 199 6)

. W hi l e t he e vi de nc e ar guably s ho w e d t hat t he r e w as a ge nui ne i s sue of fac tas t o w het herLt

. Ki nerw as deliberately i ndi f fer entt o ar i sk subs t ant i al har m t o Bus i c k when he m o ve d Sm i t h b ac k i n t o t he f o ur - m an c e l la f

t e rt he
a s s a u l t , Bu s i c k d i dn o ta l l e g e t h a tS m i t h p h y s i c a l l ya s s a u l t e dh i m a g a i n . As B u s ic kw a s n o t p h y s ic a llyh a r m e db yS m ith a fte rS m ith w a s re tu r n e dto th e ce ll, h e ca n n o t m a in ta in acla im fo rth e re tu r n o f S m ith to th e c e l l

. S ee4 2 U. S

. C. § 199 7e( e)

. A s B u si ck di d n ot present evi den ce show i n g t h at an y of t h e M ad i son Count y D e fe nda nt s ha d k no w l e dg e o f fac t s s ho w i ng a s ubs t ant i al r i s k o f s e r i o us h arm t o hi m presented by Sm i t h an d m ad e t h e i n ference t h at a s u bstanti alri sk exi st ed, he h as not show n t h at t h e m agis t rat e j u dg e erred by gran t i n g sum m ary ju d g m e n t o n th is cla im

. S ee F arm er , 511 U

. S. at837. To t he e xt e ntt hatBus i c k a r gue s t hatt he di s t r i c tco ur te r r e d b y gr ant i ng
s um m ar y j udg m e nto n hi s r e l at e d s t at e l aw c l ai m s , he has nei t he rcit e d t o a ny st ate l aw au t h ori t y n or provi ded an y argu m en t regardi n g st ate l aw . A s B u si ck h a s n o t s u ffic ie n tlyb r ie fe dh is s t a t e l a w cla im s , th e ya r e d e e m e dw a iv e d

. S ee Y oh ey , 985 F. 2d at224- 25. Busi c k a r gue s t hatt h ed i s t r ic tc o ur te r r e d b y gr ant i ng s um m ar y j udg m e nt on hi s cl a i m s t hatt he M adi so n C ount y D ef endant s i nt er fer ed w i t h hi s l egal
m a il. H e m a in ta in s th a t t h e M a d is o n C o u n tyD e fe n d a n t s i n t e r fe r e dw ith h is l egal m ai lby ref

u si n g t o p rovi de postage fora l lof t h e l egal m ai lt h at he w i shed t o s e nd a nd b y r e ad i ng l e ga lm ails e ntb y, and ad dr e s s e d t o , hi m . H e c o nt e nds t hathe w as pr ej udi c e d when t he M ad i s o n County D e fe nda nt s r e adt he
com p la i n the f

i l ed i n t h e L a m a r Co u n tycas e b eca u se th eytol dthe de fen d a n ts in t h e L a m a r Co u n ty c a s e a b o ut t he c o m p l a i nt
. H e a s s e r t s t hathe w as prej u di ced w h en t h e M ad i son C ou n t y D efen da n t s open ed an d rea d th e noti ce fr o m th e p r o s e c u to rth a t h e w a s b e in gch a r g e da s ah a b itu a l o ffe n d e rin h is Case: 07-60375 Document: 00511122897 Page: 8 Date Filed: 05/26/2010N o. 07- 60375

9 c r im in a l ca s e s b e c a u s e th e M a d is o n C o u n ty D e fe n d a n ts w e r e ch e c k in gto s e e if t h ey h adsucceeded i n g et t i n g h i m ch argeda s a h abit u alof fen der i n ret al i ati on f or hi s f i l i n g civ ill i t i gati on . I n add i t i on t o hi s al l egati on s of prej u di ce, B u si ck
ar gues t hathe s houl d nothave bee n re qui r ed t o s how pr ej udi c e bec ause he w as com pl et el y dep rivedof al lacces s t o l egal m ater i al s. Cont r ar y t o hi s as s e r t i o ns , Busi c k has no t pr e s e nt e d e vi dence show i ng t h at he w as prej u di ced by t h e M ad i son C ou n t y D efen da n t s’al l egedi n t erf erence
w i t h hi s l egal m ai l

. A s B u si ck h as n otm ad e an y show i n g t h at he w as preven t ed f r om r ai si ng any nonf r ivol ous l egalar gum entdue t o i nt er fer enc e w i t h hi s l egal
m a il, B u s ic kca n n o t s h o w th a t t h e M a d is o n C o u n tyD e fe n d a n ts d e n ie dh im
a c c e s s to t h e c o u r ts b yin te r fe r in gw ith h is le g a l m a il. R u iz v. Un i t ed S t ate s , 160 F. 3d2 73 , 2 75 ( 5th C i r. 1 99 8)

. Bus i c k’ s a r gum e ntt hathi s c l ai m i s s uf f i c i e nt
w ith o u t a s h o w in go f a c tu a l inju r yis w ith o u t m e r it. Se ei d. T o th e e x te n t t h a t B u s ic kis ra is in g h is in te r fe r e n c e w ith le g a l m a il cla im
as af r e e do m o f

s pe e c h c l ai m , he c anno tpr e va i la s h e h as n ota l l e ge d t hata ny o f h is in c o m in go ro u tg o in gm a il w a s ce n s o r e d

. S ee B rew er v. Wi lki n son , N o. 94- 10 38 0, 1 99 5 W L 58 19 39 a t* 2 ( 5t h Ci r . Se pt
. 1 3, 1 99 5) (unpub l i s he d)

. To t he extent t h at B u si ck argu es t h at th e di st ri ctcourterr ed bygran t i n g sum m ary j udgm enton hi s r el at ed st at e l aw cl ai m s, h e has nei t herci t ed t o any st at e l aw au t h ori t y n or provi ded an y argu m en tregard in gs ta t e l aw . A s B u si ck h as not
s u ffic ie n tlyb r ie fe dh is s ta te la w c la im s , th e ya r e d e e m e dw a iv e d

. S ee Y oh ey , 985 F. 2d at224- 25. B u si ck argu es t h at th e m agis tra te j u dg e err ed bygran t i n g sum m ary j ud g m e n t o n h i s f

r e e d o m o f r e l i g i o n c l a i m s u n d e r t h e Fir s t Am e n d m e n t , t he Re l i g i o u s L a n dUs e a n dI n s t i t u t i o n a l i z e dP e r s o n s Ac t( RL U I PA) , 4 2 U. S

. C. § 2 0 0 0 c c -1 (a ), a n dth e M is s i ssip p i C o n s tit u tio n . B u s ic ka s s e r ts th a t t h e a ffid a v it
o f M c N e alt hatw as s ubm i t t e d i n s upp o r t o f t he m o t i o n f o rs um m ar y j udg m e nt
w as fal s e a nd c o nt r ad i c t e d b y t he a f f i da vithe s ubm i t t e d i n r e s po ns e t o t he
m o tio n fo rs u m m a r yju d g m e n t, c r e a tin ga g e n u in e is s u e o f m a te r ia l fa c t fo rtr ia l. Case: 07-60375 Document: 00511122897 Page: 9 Date Filed: 05/26/2010N o. 07- 60375

10 B u sick con ten d s th a t t h e p oli cyi n stit u te d b y th e M a d i son C ou n ty D efen d a n ts
r eq u i ri n g a l lm a ga zine s an dbo ok s sen t t o inm a tes to be f rom T y n d a le P u b l i s h i n gC o m p a n yv i o l a t e dh i s r i g h t s t o r e l i gio u s fr e e d o m b e c a u s eT y n d a led id
n ot of fer f ree bibl es t o i n m ates w h i l e res pected reli gi ou s or gan i zati on s c on t act ed by B u si ck di d of

fer f ree bibl es. H e m ai n t ai n s t h at th i s pol i cy preven t ed h i m f rom practi c i ng hi s r e l i gi o n be c aus e he w as i ndi ge nt and c o ul d no t af f o r d t o o rder a b ib le fr o m T y n d a le

. B u si ck soug h tcom pen satory an d p u n i t ive da m ages, as w el las decl arator y an d i nj u n ct ive rel i ef

. T o t h e extent t h at B u si ck soug h t com pen satory da m ages on hi s f reedom of rel i gi on cl ai m s, hi s c l ai m s w ere barred by § 199 7e( e) becau se h e d idn o t a lle g e t h a th e s u ffe r e dap h y s ic a l inju r y . S e eMayfi e ldv . T ex . D e p ’t
of Cr i m i nalJus t i ce , 5 29 F. 3d5 99 , 6 05

- 06 ( 5t h Ci r . 2 00 8)

. As Bus i c k ha s l o ng
s i nc e b e e n t r ans fe r r e d a w ayf r o m t he M ad i s o n County D e t e nt i o n Cent e ra nd t h ere is n o i n di cat i on t h at he w i l lret u rn to t h at faci l i t y, hi s c l ai m s f or d e c la r a to r ya n dinju n c tiv e re lie f a r e m o o t. Se eHe r m an v . Ho l i day , 238 F. 3d 660, 6 6 5 (5 th C ir . 2 0 0 1 ). B e c a u s e B u s ic kd idn o t r e q u e s t n o m i n a l d a m a g e s , h is f reed o m of

reli gi on cl ai m s c ou l d n otsurvive sum m ary j u dg m en ton that basi s. S eeMayfield , 52 9 F. 3d at 60 6. As Busi c k di d no tpr e s e nta ny e vi de nc e t hatt he act i on s of

t h e M ad i son C ou n t y D efen da n t s r egard i n g h i s f reedom o f r el i gi on c l ai m s w ere ca l l ous orm ot ivat ed byev i li nt ent , he c oul d notr ec ove rpuni t ive d a m a ge s on th ese cl a i m s . S ee Soc kwel lv . Phe l ps , 20 F

. 3d187 , 192 ( 5th C i r. 199 4)

. A ccor di n gl y, w e af f i rm t h e m agis t rat e j u dg e’ s grant of sum m ary j udgm enton B usi c k’ s fede r all aw f r ee dom of

r el i gi on c l ai m s on t he al t er nat ive basi s t h at B u si ck coul d n otrec eive an y f orm of requested reli ef

on those cl ai m s. S eeMayfield , 529 F. 3d at605- 06. To t he e xt e ntt hatB us i c k ar gue s t hatt he di s t r i c tc o ur te r r e d b y gr ant i ng
s um m ar y j udg m e nto n hi s r e l at e d s t at e l aw c l ai m s , he has nei t he rcit e d t o a ny st ate l aw au t h ori t y n or provi ded an y argu m en trega rdi n g st ate l aw . A s B u si ck Case: 07-60375 Document: 00511122897 Page: 10 Date Filed: 05/26/2010N o. 07- 60375

11 h a s n o t s u ffic ie n tlyb r ie fe dh is s ta te la w cla im s , th e ya r e d e e m e d w a iv e d

. S ee Y oh ey , 985 F. 2d at224- 25. Arg ui ng t hatt he di s t r i c tc o ur te r r e d bydi s m i s s i ng hi s cl ai m s aga i ns tt he M ad i s o n Ci t y D e fe nda nt s , Spe c i alAge ntD uf o ur , Spe c i alAge ntRol l i ns , t he Bra ndo n Defe nda nt s , a nd Dep ut y She r i f f F razi er , Bus i c k m ai nt ai ns t hatt he di st r i c tc our ts houl d have di sm i ss ed t he c l ai m s i tf ou nd t o b e b ar r ed by Heck
w i t h ou tprej u di ce i n st eadof w i t h prej u di ce. H e a sser t s that hi s c l ai m s agai n st t he M ad i s o n Ci t y D e fe nda nt s di d no tc hall e nget he v ali di t y o f hi s co nvi c t i o n a nd
w er e no tbar r ed by Heckbe c ause he i ni t i al l y f i l ed t his a cti on b ef

or e he w as convic t ed an d that hi s cl ai m s aga i n st t h e B ran don D efen da n t s w ere n otbarred by Heckb e c aus e t he y c o nc e r ne d t he co nve r s i o n o f hi s pe r s o nalpr o pe r t y, no tt he val i di t y o f

hi s c onvi c t i on. Si m i l ar l y, he ar gues t hathi s cl a i m s agai nstSpec i al A ge n t D u fou r f

or sh oo ti n g a t him a n d h i s cl a i m s ag a i n st t h e M a d i son C i ty D efen da n t s f

or r ef u si n g t o cri m i n al l y prosecute S peci al A gen tD u f ou r w ere not b ar r ed by Heckb e c aus e t he y w o ul d no tund e r m i ne hi s c o nvi c t i o n. Fi nall y, he
as sert s t hatt he kne e i nj ur y he s uf fe r e d r unni ng f

r o m Spe c i alAge ntD uf o ur c o n s tit u te dap h y s ic a l inju r yt h a t h e s u s ta in e dfr o m th e d e fe n d a n ts a n dth a t h is
c l ai m s a ga i ns tD e put y She r i f f Fr az i e rs ho ul d no tha ve b e e n di s m i s s e d. Busi c k’ s c l ai m s a ga i ns tt he M ad i s o n Ci t y D e fe nda nt s , Spe c i alAge nt D u fou r , and Spe c i al Age nt Rol l i ns f o r br i ngi ng fal s e c har ge s ag ai ns t hi m , for
m a k i n g false statem en ts con cern i n g th e ch a rg es, for con sp i ri n g to co n cea lfa cts
c onc er ni ng Spec i alA gent D uf our ’ s al l ege dl y sho ot i ng at B usi c k, and f orSpec i al A gen tR ol l i n s s ervi n g as t h e t em porary f orem an of

t h e gran d j u ry w ere r el ated t o the i nves t i gat i on and pro se c ut i on of t he burgl ar y c hargef orw hi c h B usi c k w as c o nvi c t e d. As t he a l l e ge d un l awf ul ne s s o f t he de fe nda nt s ’a c t i o ns w o ul d c al lt he convic t i on i n t o qu est i on an d the convic t i on ha s not been overt u rned or ot h erw i se i nva l i da t e d, t he di s t r i c tc o ur tc o r r e c t l y c o nc l ude d t hatt he c l ai m s w e r e b ar r e d. S ee Heck , 5 1 2 U

. S

. a t4 8 6

- 8 7
. T h e d i s t r i c tc o u r tc o r r e c t l yd i s mi s s e dt h o s e c l a i ms
w ith p r eju d ic e . S ee B oydv. B iggers , 3 1 F .3d 2 7 9 , 2 8 3 -8 4 (5t h C ir. 1 9 9 4 ). Case: 07-60375 Document: 00511122897 Page: 11 Date Filed: 05/26/2010N o. 07- 60375

12 T h e di st rict cou rtdi sm i ssed B u si ck’ s c l ai m s agai n stt h e B ran don D efe n d a n ts f

or c on versi on of

hi s personalproperty on t h e groun d that t h ese cl ai m s w ere s t ate l aw conversi on cl ai m s, n otcon st i t u t i on alcl ai m s. I tdi sm i ssed Busi c k’ s c l ai m s a ga i ns tSpec i alA ge ntD uf o urf o rs ho o t i ng athi m a nd i nj ur i ng hi s knee o n t he gr ound t hatSpec i alA ge n t D u f ourw as notac t i ng as a f ede r al
em pl oyee or a s t ate act or att h e t i m e of t h ose act i on s. A s B u si ck h as not ad dressed t h e reasoni n g supp o r t i n g t h e di st ri ctcourt ’ s di sm i ssalof t h ese c l ai m s, h e h a s w a i v e da n ych a lle n g e h e co u ldh a v e b r o u g h t t o th e ird is m is s a l. S ee B ri n km an n v. D allas Cou n ty D epu ty S h erif f A bn er , 8 13 F

. 2d7 44, 7 48 (5t h C i r. 1 9 8 7 ). B u sick’ s cl a i m s th a t t h e M a d is o n C o u n tyD e fe n d a n ts re fu s e dto cr im in a lly prosecute Speci alA gen tD u f ou r w ere f

rivol ou s as B u sick “ does n otha ve a con sti tu ti on a lrigh t to h a ve s om eo n e crim i n a l l y p rose cu ted

. ” O l i v e rv . Col l i ns , 914 F

. 2d 56, 60 ( 5th C i r. 199 0)

. B u si ck’ s c l ai m s agai n stD epu t y S h erif f F razi er di d n otsetf

ort h fact s sh ow i n g a constit u t i on alv i ol ati on , a n d the di st ri ctcourt d idn o t e r rb yd is m is s in gt h e m . S ee L evi t tv. Un i v. of T exas atE lPaso , 847 F. 2d 2 2 1 , 2 2 4 (5t h C ir. 1 9 8 8 ). AF F I RMED. Case: 07-60375 Document: 00511122897 Page: 12 Date Filed: 05/26/2010