Jeremy Crozier v. Adam Endel

MEMORANDUM

Nevada state prisoner Jeremy Allen Crozier appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging federal and state law claims related to his subscription to an erotic magazine. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo a dismissal for failure to state a claim under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915A and 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir.2000); Barren v. Harrington, 152 F.3d 1193, 1194 (9th Cir.1998) (order). We may affirm on any ground supported by the record. Johnson v. Riverside Healthcare Sys., 534 F.3d 1116, 1121 (9th Cir.2008). We affirm.

Dismissal of Crozier’s First Amendment claim was proper because the prison policy banning his erotic magazine was reasonably related to legitimate peno-logical interests. See Bahrampour v. Lampert, 356 F.3d 969, 975-76 (9th Cir.2004) (affirming regulation banning sexually explicit materials as rationally related to minimizing harmful inmate behavior); Mauro v. Arpaio, 188 F.3d 1054, 1060-62 (9th Cir.1999) (en banc) (allowing inmates unrestricted access to sexually explicit material would have significant detrimental impact on inmates’ and guards’…