Craig

Craig v. Doe

Good Law
921 F.2d 279·1990 WL 212679
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 21, 199036-3_20California912 words

Opinion

Opinion

921 F.2d 279 Unpublished Disposition NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Alan D. CRAIG, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. John DOE & Does, et al., Defendants-Appellees. No. 90-55155. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Dec. 18, 1990. * Decided Dec. 21, 1990. Before GOODWIN, Chief Judge, and SCHROEDER and BRUNETTI, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Alan D. Craig, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 action as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1915 (d). 1 We review de novo, Jackson v. Arizona, 885 F.2d 639, 640 (9th Cir.1989), and affirm. 3 Frivolous in forma pauperis complaints may be dismissed sua sponte under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1915 (d). Neitzke v. Williams, 109 S.Ct. 1827, 1831 (1989). A complaint is frivolous "where it lacks an arguable basis either in law or in fact." Id. 4 Here, Craig's amended complaint alleged that personal property was taken from his cell while he was in…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.