USA v. Samuel Adam

Filing

UNPUBLISHED OPINION ORDER FILED. [16-50678 Dismissed as Frivolous] Judge: PRO , Judge: JWE , Judge: GJC. Mandate pull date is 06/26/2017; denying motion to proceed IFP filed by Appellant Mr. Samuel Philip Adams [8247160-2] [16-50678]

Case: 16-50678

Document: 00514020291

Page: 1

Date Filed: 06/05/2017

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-50678
Summary Calendar

United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit

FILED
June 5, 2017
Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee
v.
SAMUEL PHILIP ADAMS,

Defendant-Appellant
Appeals from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. 1:14-CR-100-1
Before OWEN, ELROD, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
Samuel Philip Adams, now federal prisoner # 31576-380, was convicted
of possession of child pornography. He filed a motion in the district court
styled, “Pro-Se Motion to Reverse ‘Void’ Federal Judgment/Conviction to
Correct a ‘Manifest Injustice’ and Plain Error, Pursuant to Federal Rules of
Criminal Procedure, Rule 52(b).” The district court denied the motion as
meaningless and unauthorized and because it lacked jurisdiction.

It

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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 16-50678

Document: 00514020291

Page: 2

Date Filed: 06/05/2017

No. 16-50678
decertified Adams’s in forma pauperis (IFP) status. Adams has applied in this
court for leave to proceed IFP.
Adams asserts that the federal court had jurisdiction to reach his
constitutional claims because he has a First Amendment right to petition the
court for relief. Adams has not shown that his appeal involves legal points
arguable on their merits. See Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 202 (5th Cir.
1997); Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir. 1983). We deny the motion
for leave to proceed IFP on appeal and dismiss the appeal as frivolous. See
Baugh, 117 F.3d at 202 n.24; 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.
MOTION FOR LEAVE TO PROCEED IFP DENIED; APPEAL
DISMISSED.

2