IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-50266
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
MANUEL ESPARZA, JR.,
Defendant-Appellant.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. W-95-CV-358
- - - - - - - - - -
December 3, 1996
Before DAVIS, EMILIO M. GARZA and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Manuel Esparza, Jr., has filed a motion to appeal in forma
pauperis (IFP) the district court’s denial of his motion pursuant
to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Having reviewed Esparza’s motion, appellate
brief and the record, we find that Esparza knowingly and
voluntarily waived his right to seek relief under § 2255. See
United States v. Wilkes, 20 F.3d 651, 653 (5th Cir. 1994).
The court has not yet decided whether a certificate of
*
Pursuant to Local Rule 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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 Local Rule
47.5.4.
No. 96-50266
- 2 -
appealability (“COA”) is required under the circumstances of this
appeal or whether the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (PLRA)
applies to appeals from the denial of federal habeas relief. See
28 U.S.C. § 2253; see also Pub. L. No. 104-134, 110 Stat. 1321
(PLRA). We need not resolve those issues here because we
conclude that the appeal does not involve a nonfrivolous
appellate issue. Accordingly, we DENY the motion for IFP and
DISMISS the appeal as frivolous. Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215,
219-20 (5th Cir. 1983); 5th Cir. R. 42.2. Esparza’s motion for
appointment of counsel is DENIED also.
IFP DENIED; APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL DENIED; APPEAL DISMISSED.