Steele v. Brown
ORDER Accepting 17 Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation. Accordingly, the court dismisses with prejudice this action under 28 U.S.C. §§ 195(e)(2) and 1915A. The court prospectively certifies that any appeal of this action would not be taken in good faith. (Ordered by Judge Sam A Lindsay on 4/3/2017) (ran) Modified filed date on 4/4/2017 (ran).
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
TOMMY W. STEELE, #4227-15,
JOHNNY BROWN, Sheriff, et al.,
Civil Action No. 3:16-CV-359-L
On February 8, 2017, United States Magistrate Judge Irma Carrillo Ramirez entered the
Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge (“Report”),
recommending that the action be dismissed with prejudice under 28 U.S.C. §§ 195(e)(2) and 1915A.
No objections to the Report were filed.
Having reviewed the pleadings, record in this case, and Report, the court determines that the
findings and conclusions of the magistrate judge are correct, and accepts them as those of the court.
Accordingly, the court dismisses with prejudice this action under 28 U.S.C. §§ 195(e)(2)and
The court prospectively certifies that any appeal of this action would not be taken in good
faith. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3); Fed. R. App. 24(a)(3). In support of this certification, the court
incorporates by reference the Report. See Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 202 and n.21 (5th Cir.
1997). The court concludes that any appeal of this action would present no legal point of arguable
merit and would, therefore, be frivolous. Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir. 1983). In the
event of an appeal, Plaintiff may challenge this certification by filing a separate motion to proceed
Order – Page 1
in forma pauperis on appeal with the clerk of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth
Circuit. See Baugh, 117 F.3d at 202; Fed. R. App. 24(a)(5).
It is so ordered this 3rd day of April 3, 2017.
Sam A. Lindsay
United States District Judge
Order – Page 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?