Young v. Baxley ( 2000 )


Menu:
  •                  IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
    No. 99-11324
    Conference Calendar
    LARRY DEWAYNE YOUNG,
    Plaintiff-Appellant,
    versus
    BRENDA L. BAXLEY; D. BIERA,
    Defendants-Appellees.
    --------------------
    Appeals from the United States District Court
    for the Northern District of Texas
    USDC No. 7:99-CV-199-R
    --------------------
    June 14, 2000
    Before JOLLY, DAVIS, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:*
    Larry Dewayne Young, Texas inmate #579131, moves for leave
    to appeal in forma pauperis (IFP).     “To proceed on appeal [IFP],
    a litigant must be economically eligible, and his appeal must not
    be frivolous.”     Jackson v. Dallas Police Dep’t, 
    811 F.2d 260
    , 261
    (5th Cir. 1986).
    The district court did not err in its denial of Young’s
    postjudgment motion seeking leave to amend his complaint.    A
    dismissal as frivolous under 
    28 U.S.C. § 1915
    (e)(2)(B)(i) does
    not provide the procedural protection of opportunity to amend
    *
    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    that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 99-11324
    -2-
    before dismissal.    See Graves v. Hampton, 
    1 F.3d 315
    , 318 n.12
    (5th 1993).
    To the extent that Young challenges the district court’s
    dismissal for frivolousness, his notice of appeal is untimely as
    to the district court’s judgment.       See FED. R. APP. P. 4(a)(1)(A).
    Consequently, we do not have jurisdiction over the matter.        See
    Nelson v. Foti, 
    707 F.2d 170
    , 171-72 (5th Cir. 1983).
    Leave to appeal IFP is DENIED.       This appeal is frivolous and
    therefore is DISMISSED.    See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.    The dismissal of
    this appeal and the dismissal of the complaint as frivolous by
    the district court each count as a strike for purposes of 
    28 U.S.C. § 1915
    (g).    See Adepegba v. Hammons, 
    103 F.3d 383
    , 387-88
    (5th Cir. 1996).    We caution Young 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 § 1915(g).
    IFP DENIED.    APPEAL DISMISSED.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 99-11324

Filed Date: 6/19/2000

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/18/2021