[NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT

No. 97-1593

HECTOR GUZMAN-RIVERA,

Plaintiff, Appellant,

v.

METROPOLITAN DETENTION CENTER, GUAYNABO, ET AL.,

Defendants, Appellees.

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO

[Hon. Daniel R. Dominquez, U.S. District Judge]

Before

Selya, Circuit Judge,

Campbell, Senior Circuit Judge,

and Lynch, Circuit Judge.

Hector Guzman-Rivera on brief pro se.

Guillermo Gil, United States Attorney, and Lilliam Mendoza Toro,

Assistant United States Attorney, on brief for appellee.

November 12, 1997

Per Curiam. After carefully reviewing the record

and the briefs of the parties, we affirm the judgment of the

district court for essentially the reasons stated in its

Opinion and Order, dated March 31, 1997. We add three

comments.

First, most of appellant's claims are moot because

he either has received what he wanted or because he no longer

is subject to the conditions about which he complained.

Thus, these issues no longer are "live." See New Hampshire

Right to Life Political Action Comm. v. Gardner,

(1st Cir. 1996). Second, the negligent loss of a

prisoner's property, such as books, does not implicate the

due process clause and thus is not enough to state a

constitutional claim. Daniels v. Williams,

(1986); Del Raine v. Williford,

(7th Cir. 1994) ("[t]he most that the record here discloses

with reference to lost or taken books is possible negligence

and that is not enough for a constitutional claim").

Finally, the district court did not abuse its

discretion in not appointing counsel to represent appellant.

In a civil case, counsel is required only in "exceptional

circumstances." DesRosiers v. Moran,

(1st

Cir. 1991). Because this case did not involve any complex

issues of law or fact, it did not present such circumstances.

-2-

Affirmed. See Local Rule 27.1.

-3-