Jensen v. Washington State Department of Corrections

MEMORANDUM

Washington state prisoner Ted Jensen appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that prison officials confiscated and destroyed his personal religious property in violation of his constitutional rights. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo. Shakur v. Schriro, 514 F.3d 878, 883 (9th Cir.2008). We affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Jensen’s First Amendment claim because Jensen failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether defendants’ actions did not reasonably advance legitimate penological interests. See Shakur, 514 F.3d at 883-84 (infringement upon inmate’s right to free exercise is valid if reasonably related to a legitimate penological interest).

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Jensen’s Fourth Amendment claim because “the Fourth Amendment proscription against unreasonable searches does not apply within the confines of the prison cell.” Hudson v. Palmer, 468 U.S. 517, 526 , 104 S.Ct. 3194 , 82 L.Ed.2d 393 (1984).

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Jensen’s due process claim for unauthorized…