Court Opinion

ID: 2964988
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-21 21:33:49.872157+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:02:00.802109
License: Public Domain

USCA1 Opinion

	

                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
                                 ____________________

        No. 97-1593

                                HECTOR GUZMAN-RIVERA,

                                Plaintiff, Appellant,

                                          v.

                   METROPOLITAN DETENTION CENTER, GUAYNABO, ET AL.,

                                Defendants, Appellees.

                                 ____________________

                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                           FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO

                   [Hon. Daniel R. Dominquez, U.S. District Judge]
                                              ___________________

                                 ____________________

                                        Before

                                 Selya, Circuit Judge,
                                        _____________
                           Campbell, Senior Circuit Judge,
                                     ____________________
                              and Lynch, Circuit Judge.
                                         _____________

                                 ____________________

            Hector Guzman-Rivera on brief pro se.
            ____________________
            Guillermo Gil, United States Attorney, and Lilliam Mendoza Toro,
            _____________                              ____________________
        Assistant United States Attorney, on brief for appellee.

                                 ____________________

                                  November 12, 1997
                                 ____________________

                      Per Curiam.   After carefully reviewing  the record
                      __________

            and the briefs of  the parties, we affirm the judgment of the

            district  court for  essentially the  reasons  stated in  its

            Opinion  and Order,  dated  March  31, 1997.    We add  three

            comments.

                      First, most  of appellant's claims are moot because

            he either has received what he wanted or because he no longer

            is  subject  to  the conditions  about  which  he complained.

            Thus, these issues  no longer are "live."   See New Hampshire
                                                        ___ _____________

            Right to Life  Political Action Comm. v. Gardner,  99 F.3d 8,
            _____________________________________    _______

            17  (1st  Cir.  1996).    Second, the  negligent  loss  of  a

            prisoner's  property, such as  books, does not  implicate the

            due  process  clause  and  thus  is not  enough  to  state  a

            constitutional claim.   Daniels  v. Williams,  474 U.S.  327,
                                    _______     ________

            328, 332 (1986);  Del Raine v. Williford, 32  F.3d 1024, 1043
                              _________    _________

            (7th Cir. 1994) ("[t]he most  that the record here  discloses

            with reference  to lost or taken books is possible negligence
                                                      ________

            and that is not enough for a constitutional claim").

                      Finally, the  district  court  did  not  abuse  its

            discretion in  not appointing counsel to represent appellant.

            In  a civil  case, counsel is  required only  in "exceptional

            circumstances."   DesRosiers v. Moran,  949 F.2d 15,  23 (1st
                              __________    _____

            Cir. 1991).   Because this  case did not involve  any complex

            issues of law or fact, it did not present such circumstances.

                                         -2-

                      Affirmed.  See Local Rule 27.1.
                      ________   ___

                                         -3-