Court Opinion

ID: 9439987
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-03 07:04:55.580837+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:26:53.766246
License: Public Domain

LIPEZ, Circuit Judge,
(Concurring).
I agree with the result reached by my colleagues. With one exception, I also agree with the reasoning set forth in their opinion. That one exception relates to the conclusion that Moore’s placement in the prisoner’s dock did not result in a deprivation of due process. The district court chose not to resolve the due process issue raised by the use of the dock, noting the failure of the trial judge to find an explicit security justification for its use. See Moore II, 924 F.Supp. at 1293. The district court further noted that this failure to set forth such a justification “impedes meaningful appellate (or collateral) review of his decision.” Id. I agree with that proposition. Therefore, taking the approach used by the district court, I conclude that relief is not warranted because the error in the use of the prisoner dock, if any, was harmless.