Galvan v. Downs
Galvan v. Downs
Opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-20784 Conference Calendar
ABRAHAM GALVAN,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
D. DOWNS; J. HENDERSON; D. DICKSON; J.N. BARRATT; KENT RAMSEY,
Defendants-Appellees.
-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. H-99-CV-264 -------------------- April 11, 2001
Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and JONES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Abraham Galvan, Texas prisoner # 745262, appeals the
district court’s judgment dismissing his
42 U.S.C. § 1983action
as frivolous pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). Galvan
argues that the district court abused its discretion by not
finding that his due process rights were violated and in holding
that there was some evidence to support the finding of guilt.
Galvan’s claims of a denial of due process and insufficient
evidence in connection with his prison disciplinary proceedings
are not yet cognizable in a § 1983 action. Edwards v. Balisok,
* 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. 00-20784 -2-
520 U.S. 641, 647-48(1997). The district court did not abuse
its discretion in dismissing his complaint as frivolous. Siglar
v. Hightower,
112 F.3d 191, 193(5th Cir. 1997).
Galvan’s appeal is without arguable merit and is frivolous.
See Howard v. King,
707 F.2d 215, 219-20(5th Cir. 1983).
Because the appeal is frivolous, it is DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R.
42.2. Galvan is hereby informed that the dismissal of this
appeal as frivolous counts as a strike for purposes of
28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), in addition to the strike for the district court’s
dismissal. See Adepegba v. Hammons,
103 F.3d 383, 387(5th Cir.
1996) (“[D]ismissals as frivolous in the district courts or the
court of appeals count [as strikes] for the purposes of
[§ 1915(g)].”). We caution Galvan that once he accumulates three
strikes, he may not 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
28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).
APPEAL DISMISSED AS FRIVOLOUS.
Reference
- Status
- Unpublished