Lampley v. United States ( 1999 )

F I L E D
United States Court of Appeals
Tenth Circuit
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
JUL 19 1999
TENTH CIRCUIT
PATRICK FISHER
Clerk
WILLIE RAY LAMPLEY,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
vs. No. 98-7186
(D.C. No. 98-CV-554-S)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, (E.D. Okla.)
Defendant - Appellee.
ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
Before ANDERSON, KELLY, and BRISCOE, Circuit Judges. **
Mr. Lampley, an inmate appearing pro se and in forma pauperis, appeals the
district court’s dismissal of his federal civil rights lawsuit. The district court
dismissed the lawsuit by minute order, finding that Mr. Lampley failed to comply
with Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a) and (e) and determining that Mr. Lampley’s lawsuit was
frivolous. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i); I R., tab 6. We review the district
*
This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the
doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. This court
generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order
and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.
**
After examining the briefs and the appellate record, this three-judge
panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not be of material
assistance in the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 10th
Cir. R. 34.1 (G). The cause is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.
court's dismissal of a complaint as frivolous for abuse of discretion, see
McWilliams v. Colorado, 121 F.3d 573, 574-75 (10th Cir. 1997), and liberally
construe the pro se complaint, see Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520-21 (1972).
Mr. Lampley’s arguments are neither comprehensible nor rational. After carefully
reviewing the record, we find that no abuse of discretion has occurred and dismiss
Mr. Lampley’s appeal.
AFFIRMED.
Entered for the Court
Paul J. Kelly, Jr.
Circuit Judge
-2-