Billy J. Hankins, Plaintiff-appellant, v. Frank B. Miller, Irving G. Jaquez, C.d. Hoiditch, R. Foshee,c. Mitchell, Defendants-appellees, 66 F.3d 338 (10th Cir. 1995)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT¹ 

Plaintiff-appellant Billy Hankins, an inmate appearing pro se, appeals the district court's dismissal of his 42 U.S.C.1983 claim that Defendants deprived him of his constitutional right to due process and equal protection. Mr. Hankins alleges that the district court erred by dismissing his claim as frivolous under 28 U.S.C.1915(d).

According to Mr. Hankins, the Defendants deprived him of his constitutional rights by altering his prison classification and regressively transferring him to a security administrative segregation prison without a hearing. "The Due Process Clause guarantees due process only when a person is to be deprived of life, liberty, or property." Templeman v. Gunter, 16 F.3d 367, 369 (10th Cir. 1994). Since Mr. Hankins does not hold a liberty interest in his prison classification, see id., he was not deprived of due process when he was not afforded a hearing. As for his equal protection claim, Mr. Hankins fails to allege that he was treated differently because of any suspect classification, or alternatively, that he was treated differently than those similarly situated without regard to a legitimate penological purpose. Id. at 371. Hence, the district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing Mr. Hankins' 1983 claim under 28 U.S.C.1915(d). See Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 327-28 (1989).

AFFIRMED.