Bolanos Munos-Rodrigo v. USA, et al

Filing

UNPUBLISHED OPINION ORDER FILED. [13-50329 Dismissed as Frivolous] Judge: WED , Judge: LHS , Judge: SAH Mandate pull date is 09/20/2013; denying motion to proceed IFP filed by Appellant Mr. Bolanos Munos-Rodrigo [7367460-2] [13-50329]

Download PDF
Case: 13-50329 Document: 00512325464 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/30/2013 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit FILED No. 13-50329 Summary Calendar July 30, 2013 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk BOLANOS MUNOS-RODRIGO, Petitioner-Appellant v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; BUREAU OF PRISONS; UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL; GEO GROUP; WARDEN, REEVES COUNTY DETENTION CENTER III, Respondents-Appellees Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 4:12-CV-114 Before DAVIS, SOUTHWICK, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Bolanos Munos-Rodrigo, federal prisoner # 29561-018, an illegal alien against whom the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement has issued a detainer subjecting him to immediate removal from the United States upon release from the custody of the Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”), moves to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) to appeal the denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. Case: 13-50329 Document: 00512325464 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/30/2013 No. 13-50329 challenging the BOP’s exclusion of him from rehabilitation programs and halfway houses. His arguments are foreclosed by Gallegos-Hernandez v. United States, 688 F.3d 190, 192–93 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 133 S. Ct. 561 (2012). Accordingly, the motion to proceed IFP is DENIED, and the appeal is DISMISSED as frivolous. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2. 2

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?