Javance Mickey Wilson v. A. Panizza;

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision**
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JAVANCE MICKEY WILSON,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
A. PANIZZA; et al.,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 11-17045
D.C. No. 3:10-cv-01627-JW
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
James Ware, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted November 13, 2012**
Before: CANBY, TROTT, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
Javance Mickey Wilson, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se from the
district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that
prison officials violated his First Amendment rights when they confiscated a book
FILED
NOV 20 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

11-17045 2
from his incoming mail. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review
de novo, Toguchi v. Chung, 391 F.3d 1051, 1056 (9th Cir. 2004), and we affirm.
The district court properly granted summary judgment because Wilson failed
to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether defendants’ actions were
not reasonably related to a legitimate correctional goal. See Turner v. Safley, 482
U.S. 78, 89-91 (1987) (setting forth relevant factors in determining whether a
regulation that impinges on First Amendment rights is reasonably related to
legitimate penological interests); see also Beard v. Banks, 548 U.S. 521, 528-30
(2006) (courts should accord prison officials deference when analyzing the
constitutional validity of prison regulations).
Wilson’s contention that the district court should have requested a copy of
the confiscated book to review are unpersuasive.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --