Hayslett v. Luna
Hayslett v. Luna
Opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-11361 Conference Calendar
EDDIE GILMER HAYSLETT,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
R. LUNA, Police Officer; L. GIOENI, Police Officer; UNKNOWN POLICE OFFICER, Carrollton,
Defendants-Appellees.
-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:99-CV-1278-G -------------------- October 17, 2000
Before SMITH, BARKSDALE, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Eddie Gilmer Hayslett, Texas prisoner # 799149, appeals the
dismissal of his civil rights complaint as frivolous pursuant to
28 U.S.C. §§ 1915A(b)(1). The district court did not err in
dismissing Hayslett's false-arrest claim as barred by the two-
year statute of limitations because the cause of action accrued
in May 1994. See Martin v. Scott,
156 F.3d 578, 580(5th Cir.
1998), cert. denied,
119 S. Ct. 2405(1999); Ruiz v. United
States,
160 F.3d 273, 275(5th Cir. 1998); Burrell v. Newsome,
* 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. 99-11361 -2-
883 F.2d 416, 418(5th Cir. 1989). The district court did not
err in dismissing Hayslett's malicious-prosecution claim as
lacking an arguable basis in fact because neither Hayslett's
complaint nor his supplemental questionnaire alleged facts
sufficient to establish the elements of a malicious-prosecution
claim. See Martin,
156 F.3d at 580; Taylor v. Gregg,
36 F.3d 453, 455(5th Cir. 1994).
Because Hayslett's appeal is without arguable merit and is
frivolous, it is DISMISSED. See Howard v. King,
707 F.2d 215, 219-20(5th Cir. 1983); 5th Cir. R. 42.2.
The dismissal of this appeal and the district court's
dismissal of this lawsuit as frivolous count as two strikes for
purposes of
28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). See Adepegba v. Hammons,
103 F.3d 383, 388(5th Cir. 1996). Hayslett previously had at least
one other strike under § 1915(g) because of the dismissal of
Hayslett v. Fawns, No. 3:93-CV-1820-T (N.D. Tex. Dec. 20, 1993),
which he did not appeal. See Adepegba,
103 F.3d at 388.
Hayslett has now accumulated at least three strikes, and
therefore while he is a prisoner he is barred from proceeding in
forma pauperis in any civil action or appeal brought in a United
States court unless he is under imminent danger of serious
physical injury. See § 1915(g).
APPEAL DISMISSED AS FRIVOLOUS; § 1915(g) SANCTIONS IMPOSED.
Reference
- Status
- Unpublished