Summary
requiring that the prisoner "suffer actual detriment to a legal proceeding."
Summary of this case from Bane v. Va. Dep't of Corr.Opinion
No. 11-7134
10-11-2011
TOMMY WILLIAMS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. VANESSA CRAWFORD, Sheriff, Defendant - Appellee.
Tommy Williams, Appellant Pro Se.
UNPUBLISHED
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Senior District Judge. (1:11-cv-00544-CMH-TRJ)
Before MOTZ, SHEDD, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Tommy Williams, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:
Tommy Williams, a Virginia inmate, brought this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) action after correctional officials seized various items of his personal property. The district court dismissed his complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1) (2006), and Williams now appeals. Because Williams had an adequate post-deprivation remedy under Virginia law for the allegedly wrongful confiscation, his property was not taken without due process. Hudson v. Palmer, 468 U.S. 517, 533-36 (1984). Nor has Williams alleged that any interference with his legal mail caused him to suffer actual detriment to a legal proceeding. See Lewis v. Casey, 518 U.S. 343, 349-51 (1996); White v. White, 886 F.2d 721, 723 (4th Cir. 1989). Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not significantly aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED