IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-30347 Conference Calendar

LINSTON ARMAND,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

STATE OF LOUISIANA,

Defendant-Appellee.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana USDC No. 02-CV-445-N -------------------- October 30, 2002

Before DeMOSS, BENAVIDES, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Linston Armand, Louisiana prisoner # 100902, appeals the

district court’s dismissal of his

action as

frivolous and for failure to state a claim. Armand contends that

the State of Louisiana violated his right to due process by

failing to inform him of the Anti-terrorism and Effective Death

Penalty Act’s (“AEDPA”) one-year statute of limitations for

filing a federal petition for habeas corpus.

* 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. 02-30347 -2-

Neither the United States Constitution nor any federal

statute requires a state or any state official to notify a person

convicted in state court of the AEDPA’s one-year limitations

period for filing a federal habeas petition. The district court

correctly dismissed Armand’s

complaint as

frivolous and for failure to state a claim. See

(e)(2)(B)(i) and (ii); Siglar v. Hightower,

(5th Cir. 1997); Harris v. Hegmann,

(5th

Cir. 1999).

The dismissal of Armand’s complaint by the district court

counts as a strike under

(g). See Adepegba v.

Hammons,

(5th Cir. 1996). Armand is cautioned

that if he accumulates three strikes, he will no longer be

allowed to proceed in forma pauperis in any civil action or

appeal filed while he is detained or incarcerated in any facility

unless he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury.

See

(g).

AFFIRMED. SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.