Eames v. Scott
Eames v. Scott
Opinion
No. 99-20495 -1-
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-20495 Conference Calendar
ROBERT MEREDITH EAMES,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
WAYNE SCOTT, Director - Texas Department of Criminal Justice,
Defendant-Appellee.
-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. H-98-CV-60 -------------------- February 16, 2000
Before EMILIO M. GARZA, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Robert M. Eames, Texas prisoner No. 363652, appeals the
district court’s dismissal as frivolous of a civil rights
complaint challenging the alleged confiscation and/or destruction
of items of his personal property. Eames’ appellate brief makes
it clear that this lawsuit is an attempt to relitigate an
unsuccessful state court lawsuit. “[A]bsent specific law
otherwise providing, . . . federal district courts lack
jurisdiction to entertain collateral attacks on state court
judgments.” Liedtke v. State Bar of Texas,
18 F.3d 315, 317(5th
Cir. 1994). Thus, the appeal is frivolous and we dismiss it as
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. No. 99-20495 -2-
such. See Howard v. King,
707 F.2d 215, 219-20(5th Cir. 1983);
5TH CIR. R. 42.2.
The district court’s dismissal of Eames’ complaint and this
court’s dismissal of his appeal count as two “strikes” for
purposes of
28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). See Adepegba v. Hammons,
103 F.3d 383, 385-87(5th Cir. 1996). Eames is cautioned that if he
accumulates three “strikes” under § 1915(g), he will not be able
to proceed IFP in any civil action or appeal filed while he is
incarcerated or detained in any facility unless he is under
imminent danger of serious physical injury. See § 1915(g).
APPEAL DISMISSED; SANCTIONS WARNING ISSUED.
Reference
- Status
- Unpublished