Aranda v. Wilson

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Aranda v. Wilson

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-21035 Conference Calendar

ROQUE T. ARANDA,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

MIKE WILSON; MR. BENGE, Food Service Management; PRISCILLA DALY,

Defendants-Appellees.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. H-00-CV-2236 -------------------- April 12, 2001

Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and JONES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Roque T. Aranda, Texas prisoner # 805045, appeals the

dismissal of his

42 U.S.C. § 1983

complaint in which he alleged

that, since 1998, he has been served canned chicken rather than

“real” baked chicken. This court may affirm on any grounds

supported by the record. Brown v. United States,

227 F.3d 295, 297-98

(5th Cir. 2000), cert. denied,

121 S. Ct. 1098

(2001).

“The Eighth Amendment requires that inmates be provided

well-balanced meals, containing sufficient nutritional value to

preserve health.” Berry v. Brady,

192 F.3d 504, 507

(5th Cir.

* 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. 00-21035 -2-

1999)(internal quotation and citations omitted). Because Aranda

has failed to allege the deprivation of a constitutional right,

the dismissal of his

42 U.S.C. § 1983

complaint is AFFIRMED. See

West v. Atkins,

487 U.S. 42, 48

(1988).

The three-strikes provision of

28 U.S.C. § 1915

(g)

“prohibits a prisoner from proceeding IFP if he has had three

actions or appeals dismissed for frivolousness, maliciousness, or

failure to state a claim.” Carson v. Johnson,

112 F.3d 818, 819

(5th Cir. 1997)(citing Adepegba v. Hammons,

103 F.3d 383, 385

(5th Cir. 1996)). Aranda has previously had at least five

strikes against him. Aranda v. Key, No. 00-10849 (5th Cir. Feb.

14, 2001)(imposing

28 U.S.C. § 1915

(g) bar); Aranda v. Shaw, No.

00-10844 (5th Cir. Feb. 14, 2001)(imposing

28 U.S.C. § 1915

(g)

bar); Aranda v. Millsaps, No. 99-11394 (5th Cir. Aug. 29, 2000).

Aranda filed this appeal before the § 1915(g) bar was imposed.

He is reminded that he may no longer 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).

AFFIRMED.

Reference

Status
Unpublished