green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 2×
46.6 score
G Cite
cited 2× by 2 distinct cases, last quoted 2001 ·
…an inmate has neither a protectible property nor liberty interest in his custody classification.
at p. 257
✓
cited 2× by 2 distinct cases ·
…the imposition of a sanction without a prior warning is generally to be avoided,
at p. 258
✓
cited 2× by 2 distinct cases ·
…the imposition of a sanction without a prior warning is generally to be avoided.
at p. 258
✓
Treatment trajectory · 1988 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1988
2007
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 47 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Jordan v. Coffman
a work assignment alone does not rise to a constitutional violation
discussed
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Sharp v. Anderson
an inmate has neither a protectible property nor liberty interest in his custody classification.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
McNeal v. Warden Gib Lewis Unit
See Luken v. Scott, 71 F.3d 192, 193 (5th Cir. 1995) (“the mere opportunity to earn good- time credits [does not] constitute a constitutionally cognizable liberty interest sufficient to trigger the protection of the Due Process Clause.”), cert. denied, Luken v. Johnson, 116 S. Ct. 1690 (1996); Moody v. Baker, 857 F.2d 256, 257-58 (5th Cir.) (“An inmate has neither a protectible property nor liberty interest in his custody classification . . . .”), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 985 (1988); see also Madison v. Parker, 104 F.3d 765, 767 (5th Cir. 1997) (“[T]he Due Process Clause does not prote…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Stanton v. Woodard
See also Madison, 104 F.3d at 768 (concluding that imposing thirty days of commissary and cell restrictions as punishment constitutes mere changes in the conditions of a prisoners confinement and do not implicate due process concerns); Luken v. Scott, 71 F.3d 192, 193 (5th Cir. 1995) (“the mere opportunity to earn good-time credits [does not] constitute a constitutionally cognizable liberty interest sufficient to trigger the protection of the Due Process Clause.”), cert. denied, Luken v. Johnson, 517 U.S. 1196 (1996); Moody v. Baker, 857 F.2d 256, 257-58 (5th Cir.) (“An inmate has neithe…
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Pea v. Lewis
Doc. 5, p. 5. 18 Moody v. Baker, 857 F.2d 256, 258 (5th Cir. 1988) (conclusary allegation of retaliation dismissed as frivolous); McFerrin v. Pinkee, No. 16-432, 2019 WL 3491662 , at *2 (E.D.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Phillips v. United States
Although “[t]he imposition of a sanction without a prior warning is generally to be avoided,” Moody v. Baker, 857 F.2d 256, 258 (5th Cir. 1988) (per curiam) (citing Thomas v. Cap.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Westbrook v. Navy Federal Credit Union
Although “[t]he imposition of a sanction without a prior warning is generally to be avoided,” Moody v. Baker, 857 F.2d 256, 258 (5th Cir. 1988) (per curiam) (citing Thomas v. Cap.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Guillory v. Borel
Bauved nenyo protectable property or libertyM oiondteyr ve.s Bt akine r custodial classification. , 976 F.2d 957, 958 (5th Cir. 1992); , 857 F.2d 256, 257-58 (5th CiMr.c 1C9o8rd8 )v. .
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Holder v. Cooley
Tex. Apr. 7, 2010) (citing Morris, 449 F.3d at 687 ; Jones v. Greninger, 188 F.3d 322, 324-25 (5th Cir. 1999); Johnson v. Rodriguez, 110 F.3d 299, 310 (5th Cir. 1997); Moody v. Baker, 857 F.2d 256, 258 (5th Cir. 1988); Whittington v. Lynaugh, 842 F.2d 818, 820 (5th Cir. 1988)) (additional citations omitted) (emphasis added); accord Walker, 2010 U.S. Dist.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Grillett v. Director, TDCJ-CID
Hernandez v. Velasquez, 522 F.3d 556, 562 (5th Cir. 2008); Harper v. Showers, 174 F.3d 716, 719 (5th Cir. 1999); Moody v. Baker, 857 F.2d 256, 257-58 (5th Cir. 1988).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Vincent Bailey v. Christopher Epps
Moody v. Baker, 857 F.2d 256, 257-58 (5th Cir.1988).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Corey Blount
Moody v. Baker, 857 F.2d 256, 258 (5th Cir.1988).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Rice v. Oliver
See Wilkerson v. Stalder, 329 F.3d 431, 435-36 (5th Cir.2003); Moody v. Baker, 857 F.2d 256, 257-58 (5th Cir.1988).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Hutchinson v. Hahn Ex Rel. Estate of Hahn
Tenants Corp., 221 F.3d 362 , 363 (2d Cir.2000) (per curiam) (affirming the district court’s sua sponte dismissal of a complaint as frivolous because it merely reasserted claims that had previously been dismissed as frivolous); Holloway v. Hornsby, 23 F.3d 944, 945 (5th Cir.1994) (affirming the district court’s dismissal of a complaint as frivolous based on the litigant’s history of filing frivolous complaints); Moody v. Baker, 857 F.2d 256, 257 (5th Cir.1988) (per curiam) (same).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Jackson v. Mizzel
Moody v. Baker, 857 F.2d 256, 258 (5th Cir.1988). .
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Alex Jackson v. Darryl Mizzel
First, “prisoners have no legitimate expectation of privacy,” so – absent cruel or unusual circumstances – the Constitution does not prohibit even unreasonable cell searches.22 Second, as long as the state provides for a meaningful post-deprivation remedy (which Louisiana does 23 ), then no constitutional violation occurs when a state employee negligently or intentionally deprives a prisoner of property.24 And third, freestanding “claims 20 Woods v. Smith, 60 F.3d 1161, 1164 (5th Cir. 1995). 21 Moody v. Baker, 857 F.2d 256, 258 (5th Cir. 1988). 22 Hudson v. Palmer, 468 U.S. 517, 530 …
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Jackson v. Mizzel
Moody v. Baker, 857 F.2d 256, 258 (5th Cir.1988). .
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Kossie v. Crain
See Ali v. Johnson, 259 F.3d 317, 318 (5th Gir.2001) (The Fifth Circuit has held that “forcing inmates to work without pay, and compelling them to work on private property without pay, do not violate the Thirteenth Amendment”) (citations omitted); Moody v. Baker, 857 F.2d 256, 258 (5th Cir.1988) (per curiam) (“a work assignment alone does not rise to a constitutional violation”).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Muscolino v. Landrum
See Hernandez v. Velasquez, 522 F.3d 556, 562-64 (5th Cir.2008); Madison v. Parker, 104 F.3d 765, 767-68 (5th Cir.1997); Moody v. Baker, 857 F.2d 256, 257-58 (5th Cir.1988).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Bradley v. Mississippi Department of Corrections
(2×)
also: Cited "see"
See Wilkerson v. Stalder, 329 F.3d 431, 435-36 (5th Cir.2003); Moody v. Baker, 857 F.2d 256, 257-58 (5th Cir.1988).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Hernandez v. Velasquez
Wilkerson v. Stalder, 329 F.3d 431, 435-36 (5th Cir.2003); Moody v. Baker, 857 F.2d 256, 257-58 (5th Cir.1988); see also Wilkinson v. Austin, 545 U.S. 209, 221 , 125 S.Ct. 2384 , 162 L.Ed.2d 174 (2005) ("[T]he Constitution itself does not give rise to a liberty interest in avoiding transfer to more adverse conditions of confinement.”). 9 .
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Comeaux v. Sutton
See Malchi v. Thaler, 211 F.3d 953, 958 (5th Cir.2000); Madison v. Parker, 104 F.3d 765, 767-68 (5th Cir.1997); Luken v. Scott, 71 F.3d 192, 193 (5th Cir. 1995); Moody v. Baker, 857 F.2d 256, 257-58 (5th Cir.1988).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Palmisano v. Bureau of Prisons
See Sandin v. Conner, 515 U.S. 472, 484-85 , 115 S.Ct. 2293 , 132 L.Ed.2d 418 (1995) (solitary confinement); Malchi v. Thaler, 211 F.3d 953, 958 (5th Cir.2000) (commissary privileges); Berry v. Brady, 192 F.3d 504, 508 (5th Cir.1999); Moody v. Baker, 857 F.2d 256, 257-58 (5th Cir.1988) (custody classification).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Velez v. TDC Agency's Rep. & Administrators
See Sandin v. Conner; 515 U.S. 472, 484 , 115 S.Ct. 2293 , 132 L.Ed.2d 418 (1995); Moody v. Baker, 857 F.2d 256, 257-58 (5th Cir.1988).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Thunderhorse v. Pierce
Whittington v. Lynaugh, 842 F.2d 818, 820 (5th Cir.1988); Moody v. Baker, 857 F.2d 256, 258 (5th Cir.1988).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Cressionnie v. Blount
Review of the record reveals Cressionnie has not raised any (1) viable due process claims and allowing him to elaborate on these claims would be futile, see Luken v. Scott, 71 F.3d 192, 193 (5th Cir. 1995); Moody v. Baker, 857 F.2d 256, 257-58 (5th Cir.1988); see also Jones v. Greninger, 188 F.3d 322, 327 (5th Cir.1999); or (2) a viable retaliation claim against any of the defendants other than Lieutenant Rebecca Blount, and that allowing him to elaborate on these claims would be futile, see Hart v. Hairston, 343 F.3d 762, 765 (5th Cir.2003); see also Jones v. Greninger, 188 F.3d 322, 327 (5th…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Cleveland v. Thaler
See Siglar v. Hightower, 112 F.3d 191, 193 (5th Cir. 1997); Williams v. Bramer, 180 F.3d 699, 705-06 (5th Cir.), clarified on other grounds, 186 F.3d 633 (5th Cir. 1999); Madison v. Parker, 104 F.3d 765, 768 (5th Cir. 1997); No. 02-21001 -3- Shabazz v. Barnauskas, 790 F.2d 1536, 1538 (11th Cir. 1986); Moody v. Baker, 857 F.2d 256, 257-58 (5th Cir. 1988).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Lewis v. Iglesias
See Luken v. Scott, 71 F.3d 192, 193 (5th Cir. 1995); Moody v. Baker, 857 F.2d 256, 257-58 (5th Cir. 1988).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Roth v. Johnson
Moody v. Baker, 857 F.2d 256, 257-58 (5th Cir. 1988).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Mosher v. TX Dept Cr Justice
See Luken v. Scott, 71 F.3d 192, 193 (5th Cir. 1995); Moody v. Baker, 857 F.2d 256, 257-58 (5th Cir. 1988).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Moreno v. Jenkins
Moody v. Baker, 857 F.2d 256, 258 (5th Cir. 1988); Booker v. Koonce, 2 F.3d 114, 117 (5th Cir. 1993).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Edwards v. Municipal
"An inmate has neither a protectible property nor liberty interest in his custody classification." Moody v. Baker, 857 F.2d 256, 257-58 (5th Cir. 1988).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Paz v. Weir
See Hewitt v. Helms, 459 U.S. 460, 468 , 103 S.Ct. 864 , 74 L.Ed.2d 675 (1983); Moody, 429 U.S. at 88 n. 9, 97 S.Ct. 274 ; Malchi v. Thaler, 211 F.3d 953, 959 (5th Cir.2000); Harper v. Showers, 174 F.3d 716, 719 (5th Cir.1999); Whitley v. Hunt, 158 F.3d 882, 889 (5th Cir.1998); Wilson v. Budney, 976 F.2d 957, 958 (5th Cir.1992); Moody v. Baker, 857 F.2d 256, 257-58 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 985 , 109 S.Ct. 540 , 102 L.Ed.2d 570 (1988).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Johnson v. Anderson
See Sandin v. Conner, 515 U.S. 472, 485 (1995); Moody v. Baker, 857 F.2d 256, 257-58 (5th Cir. 1988).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Harper v. Showers
See also Sandin v. Conner, 515 U.S. 472, 485 , 115 S.Ct. 2293 , 132 L.Ed.2d 418 (1995) (finding no liberty interest in prisoner’s administrative segregation absent atypical, significant deprivation); Luken v. Scott, 71 F.3d 192, 193 (5th Cir.1995) (following Sandin); Moody v. Baker, 857 F.2d 256, 257-58 (5th Cir.1988) (finding no protectable interest in custody classification). 5 .
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Turner v. Johnson
See Hewitt v. Helms, 459 U.S. 460, 468 , 103 S.Ct. 864 , 74 L.Ed.2d 675 (1983); Moody, 429 U.S. at 88 n. 9, 97 S.Ct. 274 ; Wilson v. Budney, 976 F.2d 957, 958 (5th Cir.1992); Moody v. Baker, 857 F.2d 256, 257-58 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 985 , 109 S.Ct. 540 , 102 L.Ed.2d 570 (1988); see also Sledge v. Pratt, 106 F.3d 401 , 1996 WL 765326, at *1 (6th Cir. Dec.13, 1996); Brown v. Champion, 61 F.3d 915 , 1995 WL 433221 , at *1 (10th Cir. July 24, 1995); Blocker v. Hall, 29 F.3d 630 , 1994 WL 386311, at *2 (9th Cir. July 25, 1994); Hopewell v. Berry, 889 F.2d 1087 , 1989 WL 137177, at *1 …
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
McCampbell v. KPMG Peat Marwick
See Mendoza v. Lynaugh, 989 F.2d 191, 195 (5th Cir.1993); Moody v. Baker, 857 F.2d 256, 258 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 985 , 109 S.Ct. 540 , 102 L.Ed.2d 570 (1988).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Leon Burdine v. Dr. Bruce Wells
See Hewitt v. Helms, 459 U.S. 460, 467-68 (1983); Moody v. Baker, 857 F.2d 256, 257-58 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 985 (1988).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Gartrell v. Gaylor
(Collins Affidavit, Exhibit to Defendants’ Reply, Docket Entry No. 48) Because plaintiff relies solely on conclusory allegations to support his retaliation claim against Collins, Collins is entitled to summary judgment on this claim. 9 See, e.g., Moody v. Baker, 857 F.2d 256, 258 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 985 , 109 S.Ct. 540 , 102 L.Ed.2d 570 (1988) (dismissing claim of retaliation as frivolous where claim is supported only by conclusory allegations).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Henry J. Wilson v. Al Budney, Sr.
Moody v. Baker, 857 F.2d 256, 257-58 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 985 , 109 S.Ct. 540 , 102 L.Ed.2d 570 (1988).
discussed
Cited "see"
Clinkenbeard v. United States of America
See Butler v. S. Porter, 999 F.3d 287 , 296 (5th Cir. 2021) (quoting Moody v. Baker, 857 F.2d 256 , 257–58 (5th Cir. 1988) (per curiam)) (affirming district court’s sua sponte dismissal of due process claim arising from placement in special housing unit and remarking, “[a]s a general rule, ‘[a]n inmate has neither a protectible property nor liberty interest in his custody classification’”); Martinez v. Johnson, 103 F. App’x 531, 532 (5th Cir. 2004) (per curiam) (finding that “prisoner does not have a constitutionally protected liberty interest in his classification or in remain…
cited
Cited "see"
Jason Simmons v. Methodist Hospitals of Dallas
See Moody v. Baker, 857 F.2d 256, 258 (5th Cir.1988) (“The imposition of a sanction without a prior warning is generally to be avoided.”) (per curiam).
cited
Cited "see"
Stallworth v. Greer
See Moody v. Baker, 857 F.2d 256, 258 (5th Cir.1988); Brinkmann v. Johnston, 793 F.2d 111, 113 (5th Cir.1986).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Cordell MOODY, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
J.O. BAKER, Defendant-Appellee
v.
J.O. BAKER, Defendant-Appellee
88-2418.
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Sep 19, 1988.
Cordell Moody, Huntsville, Tex., pro se.
Politz, King, Smith.
Cited by 80 opinions | Published
PER CURIAM:
In this, the 24th civil rights suit filed by Texas state prisoner Cordell Moody, he alleges that: he was ordered to work despite his classification as disabled; the order represented retaliation for his past complaints; and his good time credit is incorrectly recorded because of an error by a prison official. The district court found the complaint frivolous, and in light of the fact that 20 of the prior complaints had been dismissed as frivolous, the court admonished Moody and assessed court costs of $225.00. Moody appeals; we affirm.
Read in a vacuum, Moody’s pro se complaint states a claim cognizable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. But the score-plus prior frivolous complaints undermines his credibility, occasioning a close scrutiny of his pleadings. Cay v. Estelle, 789 F.2d 318 (5th Cir.1986). After doing so, we find no error in the 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d) dismissal of his complaint, or in the imposition of court costs as a sanction. We briefly reiterate the trial court’s findings and conclusions.
Moody contends that he should not be ordered to work because he should be classified as disabled. An inmate has neither a protectible property nor liberty inter[*258] est in his custody classification, see Meachum v. Fano, 427 U.S. 215, 96 S.Ct. 2532, 49 L.Ed.2d 451 (1976), and a work assignment alone does not rise to a constitutional violation.
Moody claims that the job he was given represents retaliation for his prior complaints. He alleges no factual basis for that mere conclusionary allegation. Standing alone, the contention is frivolous. Brinkmann v. Johnston, 793 F.2d 111 (5th Cir.1986).
Finally, Moody’s complaint about an error in the entering of his “good time” credit into the computer alleges, at most, simple negligence. A negligent act does not rise to a constitutional violation. Daniels v. Williams, 474 U.S. 327, 106 S.Ct. 662, 88 L.Ed.2d 662 (1986).
The imposition of a sanction without a prior warning is generally to be avoided. Thomas v. Capital Sec. Services, Inc., 836 F.2d 866 (5th Cir.1988) (en banc). That general rule is not applicable in the case now before us where the complaint is merely the latest in a string of § 1983 filings, nearly all of which were dismissed as frivolous. In such a setting, the Thomas warning is not a requisite to the imposition of sanctions. Thomas v. Riley, 851 F.2d 359 (5th Cir.1988). This conclusion is buttressed by our recent decision barring Moody from pursuing any further appeals unless the district court certifies the good faith of the appeal and Moody pays the costs taxed against him in previous suits. Moody v. Hughes, 849 F.2d 1469 (5th Cir.1988).
AFFIRMED.