Washington v. Burgess
Washington v. Burgess
Opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
__________________
No. 95-50546 USDC No. SA-94-CV-835 __________________
BERNARD WASHINGTON,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
GARY BURGESS; RAUL CALDERON; DARRYL ACKER, UNK JACKSON, Safety Director at the Torres Unit in Hondo, Texas; D.L. STACKS, Warden of the Torres Unit; JAMES A. COLLINS, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division,
Defendants-Appellees.
- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas - - - - - - - - - - November 27, 1995 Before JOLLY, JONES and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
IT IS ORDERED that Bernard Washington's motion for leave to
proceed in forma pauperis is DENIED, because his appeal lacks
arguable merit and is therefore frivolous. See Howard v. King,
707 F.2d 215, 219-20(5th Cir. 1983). Because the appeal is
frivolous, IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Washington's motion
* Local Rule 47.5 provides: "The publication of opinions that have no precedential value and merely decide particular cases on the basis of well-settled principles of law imposes needless expense on the public and burdens on the legal profession." Pursuant to that Rule, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published. No. 95-50546 -2-
requesting relief is DENIED and the appeal is DISMISSED. See 5th
Cir. R. 42.2.
Washington's pleadings fail to allege that any of the
defendants-appellees did or failed to do anything which actually
harmed him and which amounted to more than ordinary negligence.
Accordingly, the district court was correct dismissing the action
as frivolous on authority of
28 U.S.C. § 1915(d).
In his brief, Washington also makes conclusional allegations
that some of the appellees conspired against him. This court
will not address this issue because it was not presented to the
district court.
MOTIONS DENIED; APPEAL DISMISSED.
Reference
- Status
- Unpublished