Eric Flores v. Director, TDCJ

Filing

UNPUBLISHED OPINION ORDER FILED. [16-20406 Dismissed as Frivolous] Judge: EGJ , Judge: WED , Judge: LHS. Mandate pull date is 06/20/2017; denying motion to order the TDCJ to produce an inmate trust fund account statement filed by Appellant Mr. Eric Flores [8301317-2]; denying motion to proceed IFP in accordance with PLRA filed by Appellant Mr. Eric Flores [8284054-2] [16-20406]

Case: 16-20406

Document: 00514011318

Page: 1

Date Filed: 05/30/2017

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit

No. 16-20406

FILED
May 30, 2017
Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk

ERIC FLORES,
Plaintiff-Appellant
v.
DIRECTOR,
TEXAS
DEPARTMENT
OF
CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS DIVISION,

CRIMINAL

JUSTICE-

Defendant-Appellee
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:16-CV-1409
Before JOLLY, DAVIS, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
Eric Flores, Texas prisoner # 2051801, moves this court for authorization
to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) following the district court’s dismissal of his
42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. Flores has also filed a motion for this court to
order Texas Department of Criminal Justice officials to produce a certified copy
of his inmate trust account. As Flores has raised only fanciful allegations,
including claims that he has already been executed and that the defendants

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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 16-20406

Document: 00514011318

Page: 2

Date Filed: 05/30/2017

No. 16-20406
have used technology from outer space to harm him and his family, he has
failed to show that he should be allowed to proceed IFP on appeal under 28
U.S.C. § 1915(g) or that his appeal of the district court’s judgment presents a
nonfrivolous issue. See Banos v. O’Guin, 144 F.3d 883, 885 (5th Cir. 1998);
Carson v. Polley, 689 F.2d 562, 586 (5th Cir. 1982). Flores’s motions are
therefore denied.
The facts surrounding the IFP decision are inextricably intertwined with
the merits of the appeal. See Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 202 & n.24 (5th
Cir. 1997). The appeal presents no nonfrivolous issues and is dismissed as
frivolous. 5TH CIR. R. 42.2. Flores is WARNED that any future frivolous,
repetitive, or otherwise abusive filings will subject him to additional and
progressively more severe sanctions.

Flores is DIRECTED to review all

pending matters and move to dismiss any that are frivolous, repetitive, or
otherwise abusive.
MOTIONS

DENIED;

APPEAL

SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.

2

DISMISSED

AS

FRIVOLOUS;