Ernest Martin v. Lolita Ramos
674 F. App'x 430
| 5th Cir. | 2017Background
- Ernest Martin, a Texas prisoner convicted of aggravated kidnapping and sentenced as a habitual offender to 40 years, proceeded pro se and IFP to sue under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
- Martin alleged prison officials denied him access to the courts by failing to provide copies of documents and trial transcripts he requested, which he said prevented him from filing a state habeas application.
- The district court dismissed his § 1983 complaint as frivolous and for failure to state a claim under 28 U.S.C. § 1915.
- Martin conceded he had filed two state habeas applications without the requested documents or transcripts, but did not obtain relief.
- The Fifth Circuit reviewed de novo and evaluated whether Martin alleged the required actual injury for an access-to-courts claim.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether denial of requested trial documents and transcripts states an access-to-courts claim | Martin: denial prevented filing an effective state habeas and thus denied access to courts | Officials: (implicit) either provided sufficient access or plaintiff suffered no actual injury | Dismissed: Martin failed to allege actual injury; no viable access-to-courts claim |
| Whether the complaint is frivolous under § 1915 | Martin: claims have merit and warrant discovery/relief | Court: claims lack arguable legal or factual basis | Dismissed as frivolous; appeal dismissed |
| Whether litigant merited appointed counsel | Martin: requested counsel to pursue claims | Court: no basis shown for appointment | Motion for appointment of counsel denied |
| Whether dismissal and appeal count as strikes under § 1915(g) | Martin: not addressed | Court: dismissals meet criteria for strikes | Warning issued: strikes count toward three-strike bar under § 1915(g) |
Key Cases Cited
- Bounds v. Smith, 430 U.S. 817 (1977) (establishes prisoners' constitutional right of access to the courts)
- Lewis v. Casey, 518 U.S. 343 (1996) (requires prisoner to show actual injury for access-to-courts claims)
- Geiger v. Jowers, 404 F.3d 371 (5th Cir. 2005) (standard of review for § 1915 dismissals)
- Brewster v. Dretke, 587 F.3d 764 (5th Cir. 2009) (defines frivolous complaints as lacking arguable basis in fact or law)
- Crowder v. Sinyard, 884 F.2d 804 (5th Cir. 1989) (no access violation where prisoner filed habeas without claimed materials)
- Coleman v. Sweetin, 745 F.3d 756 (5th Cir. 2014) (plausibility standard for failure-to-state claims review)
- Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215 (5th Cir. 1983) (procedural basis for dismissal as frivolous on appeal)
- Coleman v. Tollefson, 135 S. Ct. 1759 (2015) (dismissal counts as a strike under § 1915(g))
- Adepegba v. Hammons, 103 F.3d 383 (5th Cir. 1996) (application of strikes rule under § 1915(g))