Court Opinion

ID: 8161
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2010-04-25 05:34:56+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:56:17.296498
License: Public Domain

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                          FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

                           _____________________

                                No. 95-20491
                              Summary Calendar
                           _____________________

                              MORGAN JOHNSON,

                                                   Plaintiff-Appellant,

                                  versus

                      JOHNNY KLEVENHAGEN, Sheriff;
                          K. W. BERRY, Captain;
                          JOHN DOE, Lieutenant,

                                                   Defendants-Appellees.

_________________________________________________________________

           Appeal from the United States District Court
                for the Southern District of Texas
                          (H-93-CV-2424)
_________________________________________________________________
                         December 7, 1995
Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

     Morgan E. Johnson filed a civil rights complaint under 42

U.S.C. § 1983, claiming that, while an inmate in the Harris County

jail, he was denied due process in connection with a disciplinary

hearing.     See Johnson v. Klevenhagen, No. 92-2832 (5th Cir. July

26, 1994).

     On    remand,   the   district   court   properly   awarded   summary

judgment to the defendants because Johnson did not present specific

     *
          Local Rule 47.5.1 provides: "The publication of
opinions that have no precedential value and merely decide
particular cases on the basis of well-settled principles of law
imposes needless expense on the public and burdens on the legal
profession." Pursuant to that rule, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published.
facts showing the existence of a genuine issue for trial.   E.g.,

Little v. Liquid Air Corp., 37 F.3d 1069, 1075 (5th Cir. 1994) (en

banc); Sandin v. Conner, ___ U.S. ___, 115 S. Ct. 2293, 2297-2302

(1995). The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying

Johnson's motion for appointment of counsel, Ulmer v. Chancellor,

691 F.2d 209, 212 (5th Cir. 1982); and it did not err by not

conducting a hearing pursuant to Spears v. McCotter, 766 F.2d 179

(5th Cir. 1985).   Finally, Johnson had all the notice to which he

was entitled prior to the entry of summary judgment.    Martin v.

Harrison County Jail, 975 F.2d 192, 193 (5th Cir. 1992).

     The summary judgment is, therefore,

                             AFFIRMED.

                               - 2 -