Federal Court Denies Former Prisoner Right to Catholic Television

The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has affirmed a lower court’s dismissal of a prisoner’s equal protection suit as frivolous. Raymond Gutierrez, a California prisoner housed at a Corrections Corporation of America (CCA) facility in Mississippi, filed suit in the lower court, alleging an equal protection violation through CCA’s failure to provide him access to a Catholic television network. The lower court dismissed the suit as frivolous and for failure to state a claim and Gutierrez appealed. On April 3, 2014, the court of appeals affirmed the lower court’s holding.

While Gutierrez had been incarcerated at a Mississippi CCA facility, he claimed that CCA had provided a Protestant based television network but had denied his request for Catholic based television. However, according to CCA’s Religious Review Committee, the television network, Trinity Broadcasting Network, was nondenominational and CCA could not offer individual religious networks to satisfy each denomination.

Gutierrez filed suit in the District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi in January 2013, alleging that his rights had been violated under the Equal Protection Clause as CCA did not provide access to a Catholic television network. The district court dismissed his suit in April 2013. Gutierrez subsequently filed a post judgment motion to amend, to add additional claims, and to further argue his equal protection claim. The district court denied the motion and Gutierrez appealed.

The Court of Appeals stated that in order for it to determine that Gutierrez’s rights had been violated, Gutierrez “must allege and prove that he received treatment different from that received by similarly situated individuals and that the unequal treatment stemmed from a discriminatory intent.” Gutierrez had made no such allegations or alleged that Catholic prisoners were being treated in a discriminatory way. The court additionally concluded that Gutierrez had “no protected right to watch television” and that his claim did no more than assert that Protestants had more access to their denomination’s programs. Also Gutierrez’s motion to amend was properly denied where the additional claims had not been briefed and the equal protection claim “had been raised and decided.”

Gutierrez also cited a similar claim that he had raised in a previous action in an Arizona district court, in which the court found that the claim “stated a violation sufficient to require a response.” The Court noted that the Arizona case had no bearing on the current appeal as it was irrelevant, “not precedential” and unpersuasive; the district court’s dismissal of Gutierrez’s suit as frivolous and for failure to state a claim had therefore been proper. See: Gutierrez v. Corrections Corporation of America, 559 Fed. Appx. 406 (5th Cir. Miss. 2014).

Additional Source: Associated Press

Related legal case