FILED U.S. COURT OF AP P EALS E LEVEN T HC IRC UIT DE CEMB ER 21, 2005 THOMAS K. KAH

N CLERK [ DO NOT P UB L I S H] I N TH E U N I TED STA TES C O U R T O F A PPEA LS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 05- 12186 N on - A r gu m e n t C al e n d ar

________________________ D . C . D ocketN o. 05 -001 17 -C V -C A M -1 G E N E S M I T H , P la in tif f - A p p e lla n t, v ersu s G E O R G I A B O A R D O F P A R D O N S A N D P A R O L E S , D e f e n d a n t- A p p e lle e .

________________________ A p p ealfr om th e U n i te d S tate s D i st ri ctC ou rt f o r t h e N o r t h e r n D is t r ic t o f G e o r g ia

_________________________ ( D e c e m b e r 21, 2005) B efo re A N D E R S O N , B IR C H a n d B L A C K , C i rcu i t J u d g es. P E R C U R I A M:2

G e or gi apr i s one rG e ne S m i th, pr oc e e di ng pro se, ap p e a ls th e 2 8 U . S. C. § 1915A di s m i s s a l of

hi s 42 U . S . C . § 1983 c om pl a i nta ga i ns tthe G e or gi aB oa r d of P a r dons a nd P a r ol e s . S m i th’ s c om pl a i nta l l e ge d an E x P o s t Fa c to C l aus e vi ol a t i on because the B oard’ s app l i ca t i on of an am ended p ar ol e r ec on si dera t i on rul e, G a. C om p. R . & R e gs . 475- 3- . 05 ( 2001) , c ha nge d the f r e que nc yof

pa r ol e he a r i ngs fr om on e y ear t o ei gh tye ar s. S m i th al so appeal s the di stri ctcourt ’ s i m po si t i on of a f i l i n g f e e a f t e ri tg r a n t e d h i m in f

o rma p a u

p e r is ( I F P ) s ta tu s . W e a f f irm in p a rt, a n d v a c a te a n d r e m a n d in p a rt. I . DI S CUS S I ON A . D is m is s al

of C om plai nt In hi s c om pl ai nt , S m i th al l eged general l y thatappl i ca t i on of the ei gh t -y ear se t -off rul e vi ol at ed the E

x P o s t Fa c to c lau s e . H e d idn o t a lle g e f a c ts s p e c if

ic to h is c a s e to s u p p o rt th is a lle g a tio n . O n ap p e a l, S m ith a s s e rts c u rr e n t ap p lic a tio n o f th e e ig h t- y e a rs e t- o f

f ru le prod uces a s uffi ci entri sk hi s s ent ence w i l l be l on ger than i tw ou l d b e i f the B oard r e c ons i de r e d hi m f

orpa r ol e m or e f

r e que nt l y . S m i th c ont e nds hi s ba d he a l th a nd age, curr ent l y 60 years , m ayl ea d h i m t o exp i re i n p ri son b ef ore the nextsc hedu l ed he a r i ng. H e f

urthe rc ont e nds the e i ght - y e a rs e t - of f pr e ve nt s the B oa r d f

r om re vi ew i ng hi s i nst i tut i on al cond uct , ac hi evem ent s, l ett er s of s up po rt , or any new3

i n f o rm a t i o n , a n d p o i n t s o u tth e l i k e l i h o o d o f p a r o l e c h a n g e s y e a rt o y e a r . He a s s e rt s he w a s gi ve n al i f e s e nt e nc e w i th the pos s i bi l i tyof pa r ol e a nd w a s not s e nt e nc e d t o l i f

e w i thoutpa r ol e ort o de a th, buti f he m us tw a i te i ghty e a r s f or r e c o n s id e r a tio n , h is s e n te n c e w ill b e e q u iv a le n t to th o s e s e n te n c e s a n d h is p u n is h m e n t m o r e s e v e r e . T h e P r is o n L itig a tio n R e f o rm A c t ( P L R A ) p r o v id e s “[ t]h e c o u rt s h a ll re vi ew , before do cket i ng , i f f ea si bl e or, i n any event , as soon as prac t i cabl e a ft er d o c k e t i n g , ac o mp l a i n ti n ac i v i l a c t i o n i n w h i c h ap r i s o n e rs e e k s r e d r e s s f r o m a g o v e rn me n t a l e n t i tyo ro f f i c e ro re mp l o y e e o f

ag o v e rn me n t a l e n t i ty . ” 2 8 U . S. C. § 1915A ( a ) . “ O n r e vi e w , the c ourts ha l l i de nt i f yc ogni z abl e c l a i m s ordi s m i s s the co m p l ai n t , o r an y p o rt i o n o f th e co m p l ai n t , i f th e co m p l ai n t

— (1 ) i s fri v o l o u s, m a l i c i ous , orf

a i l s t o s t a t e ac l a i m upon w hi c h r e l i e f m a ybe gr a nt e d . . . . ” 28 U .S .C . § 1 9 1 5 A ( b ) . A n a c tio n is c o n s id e r e d “f r iv o lo u s if

it is w ith o u t a r g u ab le m e r it e ith e rin l aw or fa ct . ” B i lalv. D ri ve r , 2 5 1 F . 3 d 1 3 4 6 , 1 3 4 9 (1 1 th C i r. 2 0 0 1 ). W h ereas a com pl ai ntfa i l s t o st at e acl ai m w hen “ i tappears beyond do ub tthatthe pl ai nt i ff can prov e no setof fa ct s i n sup po rtof hi s c l ai m w hi ch w ou l d ent i t l e hi m t o rel i ef . ” Fl i ntv. A B B , Inc. , 33 7 F . 3d 13 26 , 13 28 –2 9 (11 th C i r. 20 03 ).4

T o v i ol at e the E

x P o s t Fa c to C lau s e , th e ap p lic a tio n o f a n a m e n d e d s ta tu te m usti nfl i cta gre at erpu ni shm entthan the l aw annexed t o the cr i m e w hen c o m m itte d . L

y n c e v . M

a th is , 11 7 S . C t . 89 1, 89 5 (19 97 ). T he i ss ue i s w hether appl i c a t i on of

the a m e nde d s t a tut e c r e a t e s “ as uf f i c i e ntr i s k of

i nc r e a s i ng the m ea sure of pu ni shm entatt ac hed t o the covered cr i m es . ” G arner v . Jones , 1 2 0 S. C t . 1 3 6 2 , 1 3 6 7 (2 0 0 0 ). “ [N ] o tev ery retro act i v e p ro ced u ral ch an g e creati n g a ri sk of af fe ct i ng an i nm at e’ s t erm s or c on di t i on of confi nem enti s prohi bi t ed. ” I d. H ow ever , [ t ] he S upr e m e C ourt ’ s opi ni on i n [ G arner ] doe s not

r e s o lv e th e is s u e o f

w h e th e rth e a m e n d m e n t to R u le 4 7 5 - 3 - .0 5 ( 2 ) , in its o p e r a tio n , v io la te s th e E x P o s t F a c to C lau s e w h e n ap p lie d to in m a te s w h o h a d b e e n e n title d to m ore f re qu entre consi dera t i on hear i ng s w hen they com m i tt ed thei r c ri m es . R ather, i tre qu i re s the di stri ct c ourtt o c ons i de re vi de nc e of the ge ne r a l ope r a t i on of the G eorgi a par ol e s ys t em and any other e vi dence a pri soner chal l engi ng the re gu l at i on m ayprod uce thatthe am ended parol e r egul at i on , as appl i ed t o h i s ow n sent ence , cr ea t ed as ig n if ic a n t r is ko f

in c r e a s in g h is p u n is h m e n t. T h u s , it appe a r s tha ta n a na l y s i s of c l a i m s tha t[ R ul e ] 475- 3- . 05 v io la te s th e E x P o s t F a c to C lau s e w h e n ap p lie d to in m a te s w h o h a d b e e n e n title d to m o r e f r e q u e n t p a r o le re consi dera t i on atthe t i m e they c om m i tt ed thei r c ri m es m u s t b e m a d e o n ac a s e - b y - c a s e b a s is . H arr is v . H

am m onds , 2 1 7 F .3 d 1 3 4 6 , 1 3 5 0 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 0 ) . T he generalal l egat i on before the di stri ctcourtw as no tsuff i ci entt o requi re the di s tr i c tc ourtt o do a n i ndi vi dua l i z e d a s s e s s m e nta s s e touti n H a rr is . On5

appe a l , how e ve r , S m i th ha s r a i s e d m or e s pe c i f i c a l l e ga t i ons w hi c h m a yorm a ynot be suff i ci entt o sho w a vi ol at i on of the E x P os t Fac to c l aus e , buta r e s uf f i c i e ntf or a n in d iv id u a liz e d in q u iryin to S m ith ’s c a s e . “P ro se p l ead i n g s are h el d t o a l ess s tr i nge nts t a nda r d tha n pl e a di ngs dr a f t e d bya tt orne y s a nd w i l l , the r e f or e , be l i bera l l y c on strued. ” T

an nenb au m v. U

ni ted States , 14 8 F . 3d 12 62 , 12 63 (11th C i r. 19 98 ). T hu s, w e vac at e and re m and o n thi s i ss ue so S m i th m ayhave an o p p o rtu n ityto f

ile am o tio n to a m e n d h is c o m p la in t a n d a d d th e m o r e s p e c if ic al l eg at i o n s. B . Fi l i ngFee N e xt , S m i th a s s e rt s he s houl d notha ve t o pa ythe $255 f i l i ng f e e be c aus e the di s tr i c tc ourtgr a nt e d hi m pe rm i s s i on t o pr oc e e d I F P . H e a r gue s hi s pr i s on r e c or ds s h o w h e h a s n o m o n e y , a n d th e d is tr ic t c o u rt m a d e “a n o b v io u s m is ta k e ” w h e n it g r a n te d h is m o tio n b u t s till d ir e c te d h im to p a yth e f e e .

“ We r e v i e w th e i n t e rp r e t a t i o n o f th e f i l i n g f e e p r o v i s i o n o f

th e P L R A de no vo . ” B r ow n v . J

ohns on , 387 F . 3d 1344, 1347 ( 11th C i r . 2004) . S e c t i on 1915( b) o f th e P L R A r e q u ir e s , i nt er a lia , th ata p ri so n er b ri n g i n g a ci v i l act i o n IF P m u st pay the ful l fi l i ng fe e. 28 U . S . C . § 1 91 5(b). “ N everthel es s, the P L R A prov i des tha t‘ [ i ] n no e ve nts ha l l apr i s one rbe pr ohi bi t e d f r om br i ngi ng ac i vi l a c t i on or ap p e a lin g ac iv il o rc r im in a l ju d g m e n t f o rth e r e a s o n th a t th e p r is o n e rh a s n o a s s e ts6

a nd no m e a ns byw hi c h t o pa ythe i ni t i a l pa rt i a l f i l i ng f e e . ’ A c c or di ngl y , the i m pecuni ou s def

endant , al tho ug h l i abl e f or the ent i re fe e, m aypay hi s or herent i re fe e i n i nst al l m ent s. ” W i l s on v . Sar

ge nt , 313 F . 3d 1315, 1318 ( 11th C i r . 2002) ( c i t a t i ons om i tt e d) . T he i ni t i a l f i l i ng f e e i s c om put e d bythe di s tr i c tc ourtba s e d on m onthl ya ve r a ge s of

the pr i s one r ’ s trus ta c c ount , a nd s houl d the pr i s one rha ve a$0 b a la n c e in h is a c c o u n t, th e n th e in itia l f ilin g f e e is s e t a t z e r o . See i d. a t 1 3 1 9 . A l th o u g h S m i th l o g i cal l y arg u es th e req u i rem en to f an IF P p l ai n t i ff t o p ay a c o u rt’s f ilin g f e e s e e m s c o n tr a ry , th e la n g u a g e o f th e s ta tu te is p la in . See 2 8 U . S. C. § 1 9 1 5 ( b ) . T h e r e f

o r e , th e d is tr ic t c o u rt d idn o t e rrin c h a r g in g th e f e e a n d in its im p o s itio n o f

th e p a rtia l in itia l f

ilin g f e e a n d in s ta llm e n t p la n f o rth e r e m a in d e r . I I . CONCL US I ON W e a f f irm th e d is tr ic t c o u rt’s im p o s itio n o f th e f ilin g f e e p u r s u a n t to § 1915( b) of

the P L R A . H ow e ve r , w e va c a t e the di s tr i c tc ourt ’ s di s m i s s a l of S m i th’ s c om pl ai nt , and rem and so S m i th m aybe gi ven an o pp ortun i ty t o fi l e a m o tio n to a m e n d h is c o m p la in t a d d in g th e m o r e s p e c if ic a lle g a tio n s . AF F I RME D I N P AR T , V AC AT E D A ND RE MAND E D I N P AR T .