Legal Opinion
James E. Coakley v. Alfred I. Murphy
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided September 6, 1989No. 88-3784PublishedCited by 64 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
LEAVY, Circuit Judge:
OVERVIEW
James E. Coakley (Coakley) appears pro se to appeal the district court’s order dismissing his in forma pauperis action as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d) (West 1982). 1 Coakley contends (1) he was denied due process and equal protection when he was returned without a hearing to prison from a work release facility after he refused to sign a work release agreement; and (2) the court abused its discretion in dismissing his complaint without leave to amend.
The district court’s order is affirmed.
FACTS
Coakley was incarcerated in the Idaho State Penitentiary in…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Board of Regents of State Colleges v. RothSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Wolff v. McDonnellSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Meachum v. FanoSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Harry Franklin v. Ms. Murphy and Hoyt CuppCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1984
- Olim v. WakinekonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by64 opinions
- Bulger v. United States Bureau of PrisonsCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1995
- Dorfmont v. BrownCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1990
- Webber v. CrabtreeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1998
- Mathis v. SauserAlaska Supreme Court · 1997
- Coleman v. MartinDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 2005
59 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.