Davis

Davis v. Kissenger

Good Law
81 F. App'x 929
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 20, 2003No. 03-15660California224 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Charles T. Davis, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo a district court’s determination that a prisoner failed to exhaust administrative remedies, Wyatt v. Terhune, 315 F.3d 1108, 1117 (9th Cir.2003), cert. denied sub nom. Alameida v. Wyatt, — U.S. —, 124 S.Ct. 50 , 157 L.Ed.2d 23 (2003), and we affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Davis’ action because he failed to exhaust administrative remedies prior to filing a federal action. See McKinney v. Carey, 311 F.3d 1198, 1199 (9th Cir.2002) (per curiam).

Davis contends that 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (g) allows an exception to the exhaustion requirement when the complaint alleges the imminent possibility of serious physical injury or death. Even if such an exception exists after Porter v. Nussle, 534 U.S. 516, 532 , 122 S.Ct. 983 , 152 L.Ed.2d 12 (2002), *930 Davis’ allegations are neither severe nor specific enough to fall within the exception.

We deny Davis’ April 30, 2003 motion to augment the record on…

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.