EDWARD KIMBLE, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, STATE OF MICHIGAN; GEORGE A. KROPP, WARDEN; LEO LAFAY, KEITH ADAMS, AND BUSTER BUNCH, DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES

6th Cir. | 1969-06-11
No. 19137
411 F.2d 990 United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit (1969)

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.


Holding

The court held that the seizure of currency and its placement in the Inmate General Benefit Fund was a properly regulated prison administrative function, not a civil rights violation.


Facts & Procedural History

Plaintiff, a prisoner, alleged prison officials seized $350 from him and placed it in a benefit fund. The money was seized along with capsules and pil…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.


Opinion of the Court

Edward Kimble, plaintiff-appellant, brought an action in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan under Section 1983, Title 42, U.S.C. for the alleged violation of his civil rights. The appellant alleges that he was serving a life sentence in the State Prison of Southern Michigan at Jackson, Michigan and that officials of the prison seized from his person the sum of $350 in United States currency and placed it in the Inmate General Benefit Fund in violation of his constitutional rights.

Counsel for the defendants-appellees moved to dismiss appellant’s complaint for the reason that it did not state a claim upon which relief could be granted in that the money in question was contraband under applicable prison regulations and as such was required to be placed in the Benefit Fund. In a Disciplinary Board Report attached to the motion to dismiss it appears that together with the currency a sack containing some capsules and pills was removed from the person of the appellant. According to the report the appellant claimed that the money was accumulated over a period of eight months from the sale of cigarettes and that some one planted the pills on him.

The district judge held that the action of the prison officials was a properly regulated function of the administration of the State Prison of Southern Michigan and as such did not constitute a violation of the appellant’s civil rights. We agree.1 The district judge sustained the motion to dismiss the complaint. This appeal followed.

Upon consideration;

It is ordered that the judgment of the District Court be and the same is affirmed upon the opinion of Judge Thomas P. Thornton reported at 300 F. Supp. 1122.

. Sostre v. McGinnes, 334 F. 2d 906, 90S (C.A.2) cert. den. 379 U.S. 892, 85 S.Ct. 168, 13 L.Ed.2d 96

McCloskey v. State of Maryland, 337 F. 2d 72, 74 (C.A.4)

Kirby v. Thomas, 336 F. 2d 462, 463 (C.A.6)

Vida v. Cage, 335 F. 2d 408 (C.A.6)

Siegel v. Ragen, 180 F. 2d 785, 788 (C.A. 7) cert. den. 339 U.S. 990, 70 S.Ct. 1015, 94 L.Ed. 1391

United States ex rel. Wagner v. Ragen, 213 F. 2d 294, 295 (C.A.7) cert. den. 348 U.S. 846, 75 S.Ct. 68, 99 L.Ed. 667 Aragon v. Wathen, 352 F. 2d 77 (C.A.9).


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited (12 total)

View all 12 cited authorities →

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw