Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
David Allen Mann v. James Adams, and Bruce Babbitt, Governor of Arizona
855 F.2d 639
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
- Date
- 1988-10-11
- Topic
- bankruptcy
How later courts describe this case
- holding that inmates do not have a “legitimate claim of entitlement to a grievance procedure”
- holding that a state’s unpublished 20 policy statements establishing a grievance procedure do not create a constitutionally protected liberty interest
- holding that a state’s unpublished policy statements establishing a grievance 28 procedure do not create a constitutionally protected liberty interest
- holding that there is no protected liberty interest to 1 right to have a prison appeal. See Cal. Code Regs. tit. 15, §§ 3084-3084.9 (2014
- holding that 5 a state’s unpublished policy statements establishing a grievance procedure do not create 6 a constitutionally protected liberty interest
- holding that a state’s unpublished policy 10 statements establishing a grievance procedure do not create a constitutionally protected liberty 11 interest
- holding that a state’s unpublished policy statements establishing a 11 grievance procedure do not create a constitutionally protected liberty interest
- holding that a state’s unpublished policy 14 statements establishing a grievance procedure do not create a constitutionally protected 15 liberty interest
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed David Allen Mann v. James Adams, and Bruce Babbitt, Governor of Arizona. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
- Authority status
- pending
- Cited by
- 769 opinions
ORDER
In his petition for rehearing, Mann contends that the unpublished administrative policy statements of the Arizona Department of Corrections in establishing a grievance procedure created a protected liberty interest.
The Supreme Court has held that “a State creates a protected liberty by placing substantive limitations on official discretion.” Olim v. Wakinekona, 461 U.S. 238, 249, 103 S.Ct. 1741, 1747, 75 L.Ed.2d 813 (1983). The Supreme Court has also held that to obtain a protectable right an individual must have “a legitimate claim of entitlement to it.” Greenholtz v. Inmates of Nebraska Penal and Correctional Complex, 442 U.S. 1, 7, 99 S.Ct. 2100, 2104, 60 L.Ed.2d 668 (1979); see also Allen v. Board of Pardons, 792 F.2d 1404, 1407 (9th Cir.1986), aff'd, — U.S. -, 107 S.Ct. 2415, 96 L.Ed.2d 303 (1987). There is no legitimate claim of entitlement to a grievance procedure. See Shango v. Jurich, 681 F.2d 1091, 1100 (7th Cir.1982); Azeez v. DeRobertis, 568 F.Supp. 8, 11 (N.D.Ill.1982). The unpublished policy statements create no protected liberty interest.
The panel as constituted above has voted to deny the petition for rehearing and to reject the suggestion for rehearing en banc.
The full court has been advised of the suggestion for rehearing en banc, and no judge of the court has requested a vote on the suggestion for rehearing en banc. Fed. R.App.P. 35(b).
The petition for rehearing is denied and the suggestion for rehearing en banc is rejected.