Rafael Alvaro Prieto, Texas state prisoner #843320, appeals the district court’s dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint as frivolous. Prieto argues that he is entitled to damages because he was illegally-convicted of sexually molesting two teenaged boys.

Prieto is challenging the validity of his conviction, and he has not demonstrated that his conviction has been reversed, questioned, or declared invalid. See Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 486-87, 114 S.Ct. 2364, 129 L.Ed.2d 383 (1994). The district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing Prieto’s complaint as frivolous. See Martin v. Scott, 156 F.3d 578, 580 (5th Cir. 1998); 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(l).

Prieto’s appeal is without arguable merit and is thus 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. Prieto is warned that the district court’s dismissal of his complaint as frivolous constitutes a “strike” and that the dismissal of this appeal as frivolous also counts as a “strike” under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). See Adepegba v. Hammons, 103 F.3d 383, 385-87 (5th Cir. 1996). Prieto is cautioned that if he accumulates three “strikes” under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), he will not be able to proceed in forma pauperis 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; SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.