Patrick A. Dillman v. Contra Costa County Ruff, Sheriff Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors Shinn, Captain

94 F.3d 650 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Patrick A. DILLMAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY; Ruff, Sheriff; Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors; Shinn, Captain, Defendants-Appellees. No. 95-16570. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Aug. 12, 1996. * Decided Aug. 16, 1996. Before: BROWNING, SCHROEDER, and RYMER, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Patrick Dillman appeals pro se the district court's entry of summary judgment in favor of defendants in Dillman's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Dillman contends that the district court erred by: (1) determining that no material issues of fact existed in his access to the court claim; (2) ignoring his stolen mail claims; (3) improperly evaluating his interference with mail claims; and (4) relying on a fraudulent declaration. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm. 3 We may affirm the district court on any basis supported by the record. United States…