Noel Dean v. Burl Cain, et al
UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [10-31269 Dismissed as Frivolous] Judge: TMR , Judge: JLD , Judge: EBC Mandate pull date is 08/02/2011 [10-31269]
Date Filed: 07/12/2011
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
July 12, 2011
Lyle W. Cayce
BURL CAIN; AMANDA SMITH; CONNIE MCCANN,
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Louisiana
USDC No. 3:10-CV-671
Before REAVLEY, DENNIS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
Noel Dean, Louisiana prisoner # 309740, appeals the 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915A
and 1915(e)(2)(B) dismissal as frivolous of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 lawsuit, asserting
that prison officials had stolen or misplaced his inmate funds, in violation of his
constitutional rights. Dean argues that dismissal of his lawsuit without an
evidentiary hearing or an opportunity to amend was error. He additionally
contends that the district court erroneously dismissed his lawsuit for failure to
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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
Date Filed: 07/12/2011
exhaust when he in fact has exhausted the administrative remedies available to
Dean misapprehends the basis for the district court’s dismissal. His suit
was dismissed not for failure to exhaust but as frivolous for failure to raise a
constitutional claim. Dean has abandoned by failing to brief any argument
challenging the district court’s conclusion that his lawsuit did not implicate a
constitutional claim. See Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 224-25 (5th Cir. 1993).
Because Dean fails to brief any challenge the district court’s reasons for
dismissing his suit, he has abandoned the sole ground for appeal. See id.;
Brinkmann v. Dallas County Deputy Sheriff Abner, 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir.
1987). The appeal is thus without arguable merit and is dismissed as frivolous.
See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir. 1983); 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.
Both the dismissal of the instant appeal and the district court’s dismissal
of his complaint count as strikes for purposes of the in forma pauperis (IFP)
provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). See Adepegba v. Hammons, 103 F.3d 383, 388
(5th Cir. 1996). Dean has at least two prior strikes. Accordingly, he has
accumulated more than three strikes and is now barred from proceeding 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).
APPEAL DISMISSED AS FRIVOLOUS; 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) BAR
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?