JEROME CARPENTER V. RON BROOMFIELD, ET AL, No. 23-15182 (9th Cir. 2023)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED NOV 21 2023 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT JEROME CARPENTER, Plaintiff-Appellant, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS No. 23-15182 D.C. No. 5:22-cv-02086-EJD v. MEMORANDUM* RON BROOMFIELD, Warden; D. NELSON, Correctional Officer, Defendants-Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California Edward J. Davila, District Judge, Presiding Submitted November 14, 2023** Before: SILVERMAN, WARDLAW, and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges. California state prisoner Jerome Carpenter appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging deprivation of property in violation of due process. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Resnick v. * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir. 2000). We affirm. The district court properly dismissed Carpenter’s action because Carpenter failed to allege facts sufficient to show that a meaningful post-deprivation remedy was unavailable to him. See Hudson v. Palmer, 468 U.S. 517, 532-33 (1984) (a random and unauthorized deprivation of property is not actionable if the state provides a meaningful post-deprivation remedy); Barnett v. Centoni, 31 F.3d 813, 816-17 (9th Cir. 1994) (“California [l]aw provides an adequate postdeprivation remedy for any property deprivations.”). We do not consider arguments and allegations raised for the first time on appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009). AFFIRMED. 2 23-15182

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.