Carpenter v. Cornyn
Carpenter v. Cornyn
Opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-21000 Conference Calendar
SEAN DAVID CARPENTER,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
JOHN CORNYN; WAYNE SCOTT; CARL JEFFRIES; SUSAN CRANFORD; JOHN DOE; JOHN BURNS; JANE WIKSTROM; All sued in their official and individual capacity,
Defendants-Appellees.
-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. H-01-CV-2196 -------------------- February 20, 2002
Before JOLLY, JONES, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Sean David Carpenter, Texas prisoner #920783, has filed a
motion to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) on appeal from the
district court’s dismissal of his
42 U.S.C. § 1983complaint for
failure to state a claim pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). Carpenter also moves this court for
appointment of counsel. Carpenter’s motion for appointment of
counsel is DENIED.
* 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. 01-21000 -2-
By moving for IFP, Carpenter is challenging the district
court’s certification that IFP status should not be granted on
appeal because his appeal is not taken in good faith. See Baugh
v. Taylor,
117 F.3d 197, 202(5th Cir. 1997). Because
Carpenter’s nonsensical and unsupported arguments present no
nonfrivolous appellate issues, his motion for IFP is DENIED, and
the appeal is DISMISSED. See Baugh,
117 F.3d at 202and n.24;
5TH CIR. R. 42.2.
Both the district court’s dismissal of Carpenter’s complaint
and this court’s dismissal of this appeal count as “strikes” for
purposes of
28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). See Adepegba v. Hammons,
103 F.3d 383, 385-87(5th Cir. 1996). We caution Carpenter 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).
MOTIONS DENIED; APPEAL DISMISSED; THREE-STRIKES WARNING
ISSUED.
Reference
- Status
- Unpublished