Perkins v. Allen ( 2001 )

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-50397
Conference Calendar
GREGORY ANTHONY PERKINS,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
TOMMY ALLEN,
Defendant-Appellee.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. SA-98-CV-735-NSN
--------------------
February 14, 2001
Before SMITH, BARKSDALE, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Gregory Anthony Perkins, Texas prisoner # 725731, has filed
a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) on appeal
from the magistrate judge’s dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983civil rights complaint following a jury verdict in favor of the
defendant. By filing a motion for leave to proceed IFP on appeal
in this court, Perkins is challenging the magistrate judge’s
certification, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) and Fed.
R. App. P. 24(a), that IFP should not be granted because any
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 00-50397
-2-
appeal would not be taken in good faith. See Baugh v. Taylor,
117 F.3d 197, 202 (5th Cir. 1997).
Perkins has not demonstrated that he will raise a
nonfrivolous issue on appeal. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a).
Perkins’s request for IFP status is DENIED, and his appeal is
DISMISSED as frivolous. See Baugh, 117 F.3d at 202 & n.24; 5th
Cir. R. 42.2.
The dismissal of this appeal as frivolous counts as a
“strike” for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). See Adepegba v.
Hammons, 103 F.3d 383, 385-87 (5th Cir. 1996). Perkins is
CAUTIONED that if he accumulates three “strikes” under 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(g), he will not be able to 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).
MOTION DENIED; APPEAL DISMISSED; SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.