Vernon King, Jr. v. Brad Livingston, et al
Filing
UNPUBLISHED OPINION ORDER FILED. [16-40058 Dismissed for Lack of Jurisdiction] Judge: EHJ , Judge: JES , Judge: JLD; denying as moot motion to proceed IFP in accordance with PLRA filed by Appellant Mr. Vernon King, Jr. [8129067-2] [16-40058]
Case: 16-40058
Document: 00513944773
Page: 1
Date Filed: 04/07/2017
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
No. 16-40058
FILED
April 7, 2017
VERNON KING, JR.,
Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
Plaintiff-Appellant
v.
BRYAN COLLIER; STEVEN N. RICH; GENE A. KROLL; CORDLE A.
THOMAS, JR.; KEITH GORSUCH; SHARON D. ALLEN; BRIDGHETT G.
EDDIE,
Defendants-Appellees
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Texas
USDC No. 1:10-CV-36
Before JONES, SMITH, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
Vernon King, Jr., Texas prisoner # 590316, filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983
complaint in which he alleged an incident at the Stiles Unit of the Texas
Department of Criminal Justice - Institutional Division.
King moves to
proceed in forma pauperis to appeal the magistrate judge’s order denying his
motion for appointment of counsel. This court must examine the basis of its
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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 16-40058
Document: 00513944773
Page: 2
Date Filed: 04/07/2017
No. 16-40058
jurisdiction, sua sponte, if necessary. Mosley v. Cozby, 813 F.2d 659, 660 (5th
Cir. 1987). We lack jurisdiction to address this appeal. See Donaldson v.
Ducote, 373 F.3d 622, 624 (5th Cir. 2004); see also Colburn v. Bunge Towing,
Inc., 883 F.2d 372, 379 (5th Cir. 1989). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal and
deny King’s motion as moot.
APPEAL DISMISSED; MOTION DENIED AS MOOT.
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?