With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". access to the courts and inadequate medical treatment do not rise to the level of a constitutional deprivation. See Lewis v. Casey, 518 U.S. 343, -, 116 S.Ct. 2174, 2180-82, 135 L.Ed.2d 606 (1996) (noting that an inmate must demonstrate “actual injury” by showing that the denial of legal resources hindered his efforts to pursue a nonfrivolous claim); Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 837, 114 S.Ct. 1970, 1978-79, 128 L.Ed.2d 811 (1994) (requiring conscious disregard of a known, serious risk to inmate health or safety to establish a constitutional violation). Nor is Mapp’s claim relating to loss of personal property or his challenge to the disal-lowance of good time credits cognizable under § 1983. See Hudson v. Palmer, 468 U.S. 517, 532-33, 104 S.Ct. 3194, 3203-04, 82 L.Ed.2d 393 (1984) (<HOLDING>); Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475, 487-90,

A: holding that deprivation of personal property does not violate the constitution if there are adequate state remedies available
B: holding that deprivation of property does not violate due process if a meaningful postdeprivation remedy is available and explaining that state tort actions are meaningful postdeprivation remedies
C: holding that when there are no other remedies it is appropriate for the courts to imply one under the state constitution
D: holding that if adequate administrative remedies are available it is improper to seek relief in court before those remedies are exhausted
A.