From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Martin v. Harrinston

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Aug 4, 2016
No. 15-56152 (9th Cir. Aug. 4, 2016)

Opinion

No. 15-56152

08-04-2016

LANCE R. MARTIN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. T. HARRINSTON, Correctional Officer at RJD-San Diego; et al., Defendants - Appellees.


NOT FOR PUBLICATION

D.C. No. 3:14-cv-02914-BEN-PCL MEMORANDUM Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California
Roger T. Benitez, District Judge, Presiding Before: SCHROEDER, CANBY, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

Former California state prisoner Lance R. Martin appeals pro se from the district court's judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging various claims arising from defendants' interference with his outgoing mail. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We dismiss the appeal as moot.

In his operative second amended complaint, Martin sought only declaratory and injunctive relief regarding his mail. On May 5, 2016, this court received a letter from Martin indicating that he had been released from prison. Because Martin is no longer incarcerated, this appeal is moot. See Alvarez v. Hill, 667 F.3d 1061, 1064 (9th Cir. 2012) (an inmate's release from prison generally will moot any pending claims for declaratory or injunctive relief because the inmate is no longer subject to the challenged prison conditions or policies).

In light of our disposition, we do not consider Martin's contentions regarding the merits of his claims.

DISMISSED.


Summaries of

Martin v. Harrinston

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Aug 4, 2016
No. 15-56152 (9th Cir. Aug. 4, 2016)
Case details for

Martin v. Harrinston

Case Details

Full title:LANCE R. MARTIN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. T. HARRINSTON, Correctional…

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Aug 4, 2016

Citations

No. 15-56152 (9th Cir. Aug. 4, 2016)