Felton Matthews, Jr. v. Ryan Hessler
683 F. App'x 645
| 9th Cir. | 2017Background
- Plaintiff Felton L. Matthews, Jr., a Nevada state prisoner and convicted child sex offender, sued prison officials under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 after staff confiscated a hand-drawn sexually explicit comic book he possessed.
- The comic depicted pedophilic sexual activity and included graphic sexual content beyond mere frontal nudity.
- Defendants William Ambridge and James G. Cox relied on Nevada DOC regulations prohibiting possession of sexually explicit publications that threaten security, order, rehabilitation, or discipline.
- The district court dismissed Matthews’ § 1983 claims; Matthews appealed to the Ninth Circuit.
- The Ninth Circuit reviewed the district court’s decision de novo and considered qualified immunity, First Amendment, Equal Protection, Eighth Amendment, and retaliation/exhaustion issues.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| First Amendment — confiscation of comic | Matthews: confiscation violated his free-speech rights | Ambridge/Cox: confiscation reasonable under DOC rules and penological interests; qualified immunity applies | Court: Qualified immunity; reasonable officers could view confiscation as lawful given graphic pedophilic content and inmate's status |
| Equal Protection — disparate treatment | Matthews: treated differently because other inmates get Playboy/Penthouse | Defendants: comic contained prohibited content; distinction justified | Court: Claim fails (same reasons as First Amendment and on the facts) |
| Eighth Amendment — conditions claim | Matthews asserted Eighth Amendment claim (unspecified here) | Defendants: claim not administratively exhausted | Court: Dismissed for failure to exhaust (Matthews conceded no formal grievance) |
| Retaliation — failure to exhaust | Matthews: alleged retaliation but filed suit before receiving second-level grievance response | Defendants: required exhaustion not completed | Court: Dismissed for failure to exhaust (no response to second-level grievance before filing suit) |
Key Cases Cited
- Frost v. Symington, 197 F.3d 348 (9th Cir.) (standard of de novo review for summary judgment in qualified immunity context)
- Wilkins v. City of Oakland, 350 F.3d 949 (9th Cir.) (two-step qualified immunity inquiry)
- Saucier v. Katz, 533 U.S. 194 (U.S.) (clarifies inquiry whether conduct violated clearly established law)
- Mauro v. Arpaio, 188 F.3d 1054 (9th Cir.) (upheld restrictions on inmate possession of materials depicting frontal nudity as related to penological interests)