Tasby v. Lynaugh , 123 F. App'x 614 ( 2005 )


Menu:
  •                                                        United States Court of Appeals
    Fifth Circuit
    F I L E D
    IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT                February 18, 2005
    Charles R. Fulbruge III
    Clerk
    No. 04-40043
    Summary Calendar
    LEON TASBY,
    Plaintiff-Appellant,
    versus
    JAMES A. LYNAUGH, JAMES S. O’HARE; W. MCCALL; SERGEANT BOOTHE;
    SERGEANT SHARP; SERGEANT STEWARD; OFFICER HEARN;
    OFFICER ANDREW; OFFICER WILSON; LIEUTENANT MAY,
    Defendants-Appellees.
    --------------------
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Eastern District of Texas
    USDC No. 9:88-CV-169
    --------------------
    Before REAVLEY, JOLLY and HIGGINBOTHAM, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:*
    Leon Tasby, Texas prisoner # 362523, appeals the summary-
    judgment dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint in which he
    alleged that a strip search in the presence of female prison
    employees violated his right to privacy.    As an initial matter,
    Tasby’s motion for leave to file an out-of-time reply brief is
    GRANTED.
    *
    Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that
    this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except
    under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
    No. 04-40043
    -2-
    Tasby’s claims that the magistrate judge was without
    authority to enter the judgment of dismissal and that the
    judgment of dismissal was void because defense counsel was not
    formally admitted to practice before the district court are
    without merit.   See 28 U.S.C. § 636(c); Carter v. Sea Land
    Servs., Inc., 
    816 F.2d 1018
    , 1021 (5th Cir. 1987).
    Tasby has also failed to show that the district court erred
    in granting summary judgment.   Little v. Liquid Air Corp., 
    37 F.3d 1069
    , 1075 (5th Cir. 1994)(en banc).   This court has held
    that strip searches carried out in nonsecluded areas of the
    prison and in the presence of prison employees of the opposite
    sex are not unconstitutional.   Letcher v. Turner, 
    968 F.2d 508
    ,
    510 (5th Cir. 1992);   Elliott v. Lynn, 
    38 F.3d 188
    , 190-92 (5th
    Cir. 1994); Oliver v. Scott, 
    276 F.3d 736
    , 747 (5th Cir. 2002).
    The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
    MOTION FOR LEAVE GRANTED; AFFIRMED.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 04-40043

Citation Numbers: 123 F. App'x 614

Judges: Higginbotham, Jolly, Per Curiam, Reavley

Filed Date: 2/18/2005

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/2/2023