UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FIFTH CIRCUIT
_________________
No. 96-20615
(Summary Calendar)
_________________
KENRIC JACKSON,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
J. BLACK; JAMES A. COLLINS, Director, Texas
Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional
Division; JOHNNY KLEVENHAGEN, Sheriff,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
For the Southern District of Texas
(CA-H-94-772)
May 29, 1997
Before DAVIS, EMILIO M. GARZA, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Kenric Jackson, Texas state prisoner # 666617, requests
permission to proceed in forma pauperis in the appeal of the denial
of his pro se and in forma pauperis complaint filed pursuant to 42
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
U.S.C. § 1983. On January 9, 1997, Chief Judge Politz ordered
Jackson to file an affidavit for leave to proceed in forma pauperis
on appeal pursuant to the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1996
(“PLRA”). The order held Jackson’s appeal in abeyance for thirty
days pending payment of the $105 filing fee or submittal of the
required documents pursuant to the PLRA. After obtaining a short
extension of time, Jackson timely responded; however, the
documentation submitted by Jackson does not fully comply with the
requirements imposed by the PLRA, because the information regarding
his prison trust account covers the six months prior to his amended
filing in February 1997, not the six months that preceded his
notice of appeal filed June 17, 1996.
Although Jackson’s prison account statement covers the wrong
six-month period, we find that it is in substantial compliance with
the requirements of section 1915(b)(1)(B) of the PLRA. Jackson has
shown that he is unable to prepay the filing fee and qualifies to
proceed in forma pauperis under the PLRA.
However, after reviewing his complaint and the record, we find
that Jackson’s appeal is completely without merit. The PLRA
provides that, “[n]otwithstanding any filing fee, or any portion
thereof, that may have been paid, the court shall dismiss the case
at any time if the court determines that . . . the action or appeal
. . . is frivolous or malicious.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii).
We dismiss Jackson’s appeal as frivolous, and warn him that future
-2-
frivolous actions in the district court or in this court may result
in his being unable to proceed in forma pauperis ever again. See
28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) (“In no event shall a prisoner bring a civil
action or appeal a judgment in a civil action or proceeding under
this section if the prisoner has, on 3 or more prior occasions,
while incarcerated or detained in any facility, brought an action
or appeal in a court of the United States that was dismissed on the
grounds that it is frivolous . . . .”).
Despite our dismissal of Jackson’s frivolous claim, the PLRA
requires that he pay the full filing fee of $105 for this appeal.
Because Jackson’s prison account demonstrates that he cannot pay
the fee at this time, the court is to collect an initial, partial
filing fee, equal to twenty percent of the greater of: (a) the
average monthly deposits to Jackson’s trust fund account, or (b)
the average monthly balance in that account for the six-month
period preceding the filing of his notice of appeal. After payment
of the initial partial filing fee, the court will deduct funds from
Jackson’s account until the full filing fee is paid. 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(b)(1)-(2), as amended by the PLRA.
DISMISSED.
-3-