Filed: Apr. 20, 2005
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT April 20, 2005 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 04-41199 Conference Calendar SALVADOR RIOS, Plaintiff-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 2:04-CV-102 - Before JONES, SMITH, and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Salvador Rios, federal prisoner #08394-023, wrote a letter about conditions at the Brooks County Detentio
Summary: United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT April 20, 2005 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 04-41199 Conference Calendar SALVADOR RIOS, Plaintiff-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 2:04-CV-102 - Before JONES, SMITH, and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Salvador Rios, federal prisoner #08394-023, wrote a letter about conditions at the Brooks County Detention..
More
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT April 20, 2005
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 04-41199
Conference Calendar
SALVADOR RIOS,
Plaintiff-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. 2:04-CV-102
--------------------
Before JONES, SMITH, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Salvador Rios, federal prisoner #08394-023, wrote a letter
about conditions at the Brooks County Detention Center on behalf
of himself and other inmates, which was treated as a complaint in
a civil rights action and dismissed without prejudice. Rios
contends that federal officials subsequently mishandled his mail
and legal materials, thereby hindering his refiling of a proper
complaint. Rios seeks a remand and an opportunity to file an
amended complaint. However, he fails to identify any specific
defendant or violation of a constitutional right in connection
with the dismissed action. He thus has identified no error in
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that
this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except
under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
No. 04-41199
-2-
the district court’s dismissal. See 28 U.S.C.
§§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii), 1915A(b)(1).
The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.