Document: 112 S.Ct. 1728 504 U.S. 25 118 L.Ed.2d 340 George F. DENTON, Director of Corrections California, et al., Petitioners,v.Mike HERNANDEZ. No. 90-1846. Argued Feb. 24, 1992. Decided May 4, Syllabus Respondent Hernandez, a prisoner proceeding pro se, filed five civil rights suits in forma pauperis against petitioner California prison officials, alleging, inter alia, that he was drugged and homosexually raped 28 times by various inmates officials at different institutions. Finding the facts alleged appeared to be wholly fanciful, District Court dismissed cases under U.S.C. § 1915(d), which allows courts dismiss an complaint "if satisfied action is frivolous." Reviewing dismissals de novo, Appeals reversed remanded three cases. The court's lead opinion concluded court can as factually frivolous only if allegations conflict with judicially noticeable it impossible take judicial notice none rapes occurred; concurring circuit precedent required Hernandez given his claims were chance amend complaints. adhered these positions on remand from this for consideration Court's intervening decision Neitzke v. Williams, 490 319, 109 1827, 104 338 held "is [under 1915(d) ] where lacks arguable basis either law or fact," id., 325, S.Ct., 1831. Held: 1. incorrectly limited power granted case 1915(d). Section gives "the unusual pierce veil complaint's factual those whose contentions are clearly baseless." Id., 327, 1833. Thus, not bound, usually when making determination based solely pleadings, accept without question truth plaintiff's allegations. However, order respect congressional goal assuring equality all litigants, initial assessment must weighted favor. A frivolousness finding appropriate rise level irrational incredible, whether there available contradict them, but cannot simply because finds improbable unlikely. "clearly baseless" guidepost need defined more precision, since district best position determine fall into category, statute's instruction allowing dismissal "satisfied" indicates entrusted discretion entertaining complaint. Pp. 31-33. 2. Because discretionary one, properly reviewed abuse discretion. It would appeals consider, among other things, plaintiff inappropriately resolved genuine issues disputed fact, applied erroneous legal conclusions, has provided statement explaining facilitates intelligent appellate review, prejudice. With last factor, reviewing should abused its dismissing prejudice leave appears could remedied through specific pleading, have res judicata effect determinations future petitions. This expresses no Appeals' rule se litigant bringing suit entitled opportunity overcome any deficiency unless clear amendment cure defect. 33-35. 929 F.2d 1374 (CA9 1990), remanded. O'CONNOR, J., delivered Court, REHNQUIST, C.J., WHITE, SCALIA, KENNEDY, SOUTER, THOMAS, JJ., joined. STEVENS, dissenting opinion, BLACKMUN, James Ching, Sacramento, Cal., petitioners. Richard W. Nichols, respondent. Justice O'CONNOR Court. 1 federal statute, codified 1915, indigent commence criminal paying administrative costs lawsuit. statute protects abuses privilege allegation poverty untrue, malicious." In (1989), we considered standard determining inquiry litigant's justify frivolousness, proper review such dismissal. 2 * Petitioners fifteen institutions penal system. Between 1983 1985, respondent Mike state named petitioners defendants pauperis. relevant part, complaints allege total institutions.1 few exceptions, perpetrators identified complaints, does claim direct recollection incidents. Rather, asserts found needle marks parts body, fecal semen stains clothes, led him believe had been while slept. 3 Hernandez's sexually assaulted nights January 13, 1984, 27, supported affidavit signed fellow Armando Esquer (Esquer Affidavit), states: 4 "On approximately 7:30 a.m., I 5 my way shower, saw correctional officer McIntyre, P-2 Unit Officer, unlock inmate cell door subsequently two black stepped inside cell. did see Officer McIntyre out after they inside, even though asleep inside. After about ten minutes, returned noticed friend, being inmates. lock out. watch[ed] activity hallway door. 6 27th, again 7 same unlocked door, also Then knew right away both up good. incident, became convinced deliberately unlocking [lay] asleep, so assault cell." Exhibit H CIV S-85-0084, Brief 9. 8 attempted one include Harold Pierce, alleging night July 29, 1983, "witnessed Dushane B-71187 Milliard B-30802 rape lay . bed 206 N-2 Dorm." See G Motion Amend Complaint Denton, S-83-1348 (June 19, 1984), 6. 9 determined related referred them magistrate, who recommended frivolous. magistrate reasoned "each complaint, taken separately, necessarily frivolous," "a picture emerges reading together." 11. As explained: "[Hernandez] alleges guards inmates, institutions, subjected sexual assaults. Despite fact allegedly responsible each assault, purported modus operandi identical every case. Moreover, attacks occurred sporadically throughout year period. thus appear 'wholly fanciful' actions Ibid. By dated 5, 1986, adopted recommendation 10 appealed (Nos. S-83-0645, S-83-1348, S-85-0084; n. 1, supra ). Ninth Circuit 861 1421 (1988). Judge Schroeder's conflicted facts, is, " 'capable accurate ready resort sources accuracy reasonably questioned.' 1426 (quoting Fed. Rule Evid. 201). case, Schroeder wrote, occurred. F.2d, 1426. Wallace concurred ground remedy deficiencies. 1427. Aldisert dissented. He hallucinations troubled man," 1440, further save 1439-1440. 11 We petitioners' first petition writ certiorari, 493 801, 110 37, 107 vacated judgment, our (1989). On remand, reaffirmed earlier decision. 1990). modified her original just "one useful standard" rape. 1376. repeated their views. 12 second certiorari consider may 502 ----, 369, 116 322 (1991). hold therefore vacate application standard. II 13 enacting Congress "intended guarantee citizen shall denied commence, prosecute, defend action, criminal, United States, makes pay secure costs" litigation. Adkins E.I. DuPont Nemours & Co., 335 331, 342, 69 85, 90, 93 L.Ed. 43 (1948) (internal quotations omitted). At time sought lower access barriers indigent, however, recognized filing fees assumed public, unlike litigant, economic incentive refrain frivolous, malicious, repetitive lawsuits." Neitzke, supra, 324, response concern, included subsection (d) part 14 us occasion construe meaning "frivolous" containing fact." concerned fails Federal Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) nonetheless "an law" precluding U.S., 328-329, holding, observed 12(b)(6), "accords judges authority indisputably meritless theory, "Examples latter class," said, "are describing fantastic delusional scenarios, too familiar." 328, 15 contend below inconsistent "unusual" agree. Contrary Circuit's assumption, "pierce allegations" means reject notion "having fact", id. 1831, rebutted facts. time, "assur[ing] litigants," Coppedge 369 438, 447, 82 917, 922, 21 (1962), favor plaintiff. words, determination, frequently made sua sponte before defendant asked file answer, serve factfinding process resolution 16 stated baseless," 1833, category encompassing "fanciful," "fantastic," "delusional," ibid. words suggest, them. An dismissed, Some might disposed summary development disregard age-old insight many "strange, true; always strange, Stranger than fiction." Lord Byron, Don Juan, canto XIV, stanza 101 (T. Steffan, E. Steffan Pratt eds. 1977). 17 Although urges define confident courts, "all familiar" claims, category. Indeed, petition. decline invitation reduce monolithic 18 discretion, error novo. Cf. Boag MacDougall, 454 364, 365, n., 102 700, 701, 70 551 (1982) (per curiam ) (reversing conclusion exercise "broad discretion" 1915(d)); Coppedge, 446, 921 (District certification appellant taking appeal good faith, 1915(a), "entitled weight"). Haines Kerner, 404 519, 520-521, 92 594, 596, 30 652 (1972); 32-33; Boag, n.; "intelligent review," ibid.; 19 factor: merits, rather paid could, See, e.g., Bryant Civiletti, 214 U.S.App.D.C. 109, 110-111, 663 286, 287-288, (1981) (§ ); Warren McCall, 709 1183, 1186, (CA7 1983) (same); cf. Rogers Bruntrager, 841 853, 855 (CA8 1988) (noting principles "somewhat problematical"). Therefore, disposition amend. us, express rule, below, E.g., Potter 433 1087, 1088 1970); Noll Carlson, 809 1446 1987). 20 Accordingly, judgment proceedings consistent opinion. ordered. 22 whom BLACKMUN joins, dissenting. 23 My disagreement narrow. agree articulation supports expressing view Rufo Inmates Suffolk County Jail, 748, 867 (1992). Nevertheless, am entirely announced today, affirm judgment. Amended Ylst, S-83-0645 (Feb. 9, 1984) (alleging unidentified officers State Prison Folsom 1982), 2-4; prisoners Medical Facility Vacaville additional episode December 1983), 5; S-84-1074 (Aug. 20, six druggings occurring between August November 6; S-84-1198 (Sept. 17, incidents 26 12, 6-7; S-85-0084 (Jan. 21, 1985) 10, 7.

Category: 1