Luevano v. Abbott et al

Filing 3

ORDER OF DISMISSAL. Plaintiffs pleadings do not show that he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury in this case. The 1 petition for a writ of mandamus is DISMISSED under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) and 1915(g)....***Case terminated on 5/3/18...*** Email sent to Manager of Three Strikes List. (Signed by Judge Kenneth M Hoyt) Parties notified.(sanderson, 4)

United States District Court
Southern District of Texas

ENTERED
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
HOUSTON DIVISION
JAIME LUEVANO,
Plaintiff,
VS.
GREG ABBOTT, et al,
Defendants.

§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§

May 03, 2018
David J. Bradley, Clerk

CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:18-CV-1390

ORDER OF DISMISSAL
Plaintiff Jaime Luevano is an inmate in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. He
filed a document, styled as a petition for a writ of mandamus, that challenges the conditions of
his confinement. Luevano has not paid the filing fee.
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), an inmate is not allowed to bring a civil action in forma
pauperis in federal court if, on three or more prior occasions while incarcerated, he brought an
action or appeal which was dismissed as frivolous, malicious, or for failure to state a claim upon
which relief may be granted, unless he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury at the
time suit is filed. Luevano has had at least 12 cases dismissed as frivolous. See Luevano v.
Region Directors, No. 4:12-cv-1022 (S.D. Tex. Apr. 10, 2012); Luevano v. United States Dist.
Judge, No. 6:12-cv-49 (W.D. Tex. March 5, 2012); Luevano v. U.S. Dist. Cts. Of Texas, No.
6:11-cv-203 (E.D. Tex. May 23, 2011); Luevano v. Office of Inspector General, No. 5:11-cv-131
(W.D. Tex. Feb. 28, 2011); Luevano v. Connally Unit, No. 5:10-cv-831 (W.D. Tex. Oct. 26,
2010); Luevano v. Texas Supreme Ct., No. 5:09-cv-434 (W.D. Tex. June 5, 2009); Luevano v.
Casey, No. 3:09-cv-583 (M.D.. Pa. May 27, 2009); Luevano v. U.S. Supreme Ct. Clerks, No.
1:09-cv-71 (D.D.C. Jan. 13, 2009); Luevano v. Boykin, No. 5:08-cv-1844 (N.D. Ohio Oct. 31,
2008); Luevano v. Richardson, No. 1:08-cv-781 (D.N.M. Oct. 1, 2008); Luevano v. Clinton, No.

1/3

2:08-cv-1360 (N.D.N.Y. Apr. 4, 2008); Luevano v. Board of Disciplinary Appeals, No. 5:08-cv107 (W.D. Tex. March 20, 2008). Plaintiff’s pleadings do not show that he is under imminent
danger of serious physical injury in this case. Therefore, this lawsuit must be dismissed pursuant
to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).
Even if the pleading could be interpreted to allege that Luevano is in imminent danger of
serious physical injury, it is subject to dismissal as frivolous. Luevano’s pleading is a single
handwritten page of incoherent gibberish. Among the matters he asserts is a complaint that
something is amiss because the name of the Clerk of Court for the Southern District of Texas
appears on documents Luevano has received from both the Houston and Corpus Christi
Divisions, and “can he be in two (2) places at a time?” In addition to naming as defendants the
Governor and Attorney General of Texas, the Texas Department of Criminal Justice’s Office of
the Inspector General, and the United States Department of Agriculture and Food and Drug
Administration, Luevano’s pleading mentions college professors from West Virginia, Clarkson
University, and North Carolina State University, as well as United States Senators Cory Booker
of New Jersey, and Chuck Grassley of Iowa.
28 U.S.C. §1915(e)(2)(B)(i) requires dismissal if the action is frivolous or malicious.
The Fifth Circuit has noted that “[a] complaint is factually frivolous when the facts alleged are
fantastic or delusional scenarios . . . .” Harris v. Hegmann, 198 F.3d 153, 156 (5th Cir.
1999)(internal quotation marks and citation omitted). Luevano’s incoherent rambling is plainly
“fantastic or delusional.” It must therefore be dismissed.
For the foregoing reasons, the petition for a writ of mandamus (Doc. # 1) is DISMISSED
under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) and 1915(g). This dismissal shall count as a strike for

2/3

purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).

The Clerk shall forward a copy of this Order to:

[e-mail].
It is so ORDERED.
SIGNED on this 3rd day of May, 2018.
___________________________________
Kenneth M. Hoyt
United States District Judge

3/3