Jones v. Dunn et al (INMATE 1)

Filing 35

ORDER: On January 8, 2021, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals construed Plaintiff's June 16, 2020 filing (Doc. 30 ) as a notice of appeal of the June 15, 2020 final judgment. (Doc. 31 .) On January 29, 2021, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals granted Plaintiff an extension of time until February 26, 2021, to file a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. (Doc. 34 .) In the interest of efficiency and for the benefit of Plaintiff, it is ORDERED that the notice of appeal (Doc. 30 ) is construed as containing a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. "An appeal may not be taken in forma pauperis if the trial court certifies in writing that it not taken in good good faith." 28 U.S.C. 1915(a). In making that determination, the court uses an objective standard, such as whether the appeal is "frivolous," or "has no substantive merit." Applying this standard, the court is of the opinion, for the reasons stated in the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (Doc. 27 ) and the Order adopting the Recommendation (Doc. 28 ), that Plaintiff's appeal is without a legal or factual basis and accordingly is frivolous for purposes of Plaintiff's motion. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion for leave to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis (Doc. 30 ) is DENIED. Signed by Honorable Judge William Keith Watkins on 2/2/2021. Furnished Appeals Clerk. (dmn, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
NORTHERN DIVISION
MARCUS ANTONIO JONES,
#203884,
Plaintiff,
v.
OFFICER JAMES NOLIN,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CASE NO. 2:17-CV-342-WKW
[WO]

ORDER
On January 8, 2021, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals construed
Plaintiff’s June 16, 2020 filing (Doc. # 30) as a notice of appeal of the June 15, 2020
final judgment. (Doc. # 31.) On January 29, 2021, the Eleventh Circuit Court of
Appeals granted Plaintiff an extension of time until February 26, 2021, to file a
motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. (Doc. # 34.) In the interest
of efficiency and for the benefit of Plaintiff, it is ORDERED that the notice of appeal
(Doc. # 30) is construed as containing a motion for leave to proceed in forma
pauperis on appeal.
“An appeal may not be taken in forma pauperis if the trial court certifies in
writing that it is not taken in good faith.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). In making that
determination, the court uses an objective standard, such as whether the appeal is
“frivolous,” Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 445 (1962), or “has no

substantive merit,” United States v. Bottoson, 644 F.2d 1174, 1176 (5th Cir. Unit B
May 1981). 1
Applying this standard, the court is of the opinion, for the reasons stated in
the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (Doc. # 27) and the Order adopting
the Recommendation (Doc. # 28), that Plaintiff’s appeal is without a legal or factual
basis and accordingly is frivolous for purposes of Plaintiff’s motion. See Rudolph
v. Allen, 666 F.2d 519, 520 (11th Cir. 1982).
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion for leave to proceed on
appeal in forma pauperis (Doc. # 30) is DENIED.
DONE this 2nd day of February, 2021.
/s/ W. Keith Watkins
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

1

In Bonner v. City of Prichard, 661 F.2d 1206 (11th Cir. 1981) (en banc), the Eleventh
Circuit adopted as binding precedent all of the decisions of the former Fifth Circuit handed down
prior to the close of business on September 30, 1981.
2