IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-31241
Conference Calendar
RAYMOND ROCHON,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
BURL CAIN, Warden;
RICHARD L. STALDER;
EDWIN EDWARDS,
Defendants-Appellees.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Louisiana
USDC No. 95-CV-1701
- - - - - - - - - -
December 10, 1997
Before BARKSDALE, BENAVIDES, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Raymond Rochon, Louisiana prisoner # 93625, filed an action
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against various employees of the
Louisiana Department of Public Safety and Corrections alleging
that prison officials were failing to protect him from his
enemies. The district court dismissed the action as frivolous
under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e) and we review the dismissal for abuse
of discretion. Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 31-33 (1992)
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.
No. 96-31241
-2-
The fact that Washington attacked Rochon in 1988 does not
establish that Rochon was in any current danger from Washington.
The prison officials have continued to house the two inmates in
different facilities, with the only lapse in the separation being
that Washington came to Angola to play ball. Rochon does not
allege that Washington attacked him or had any contact with him
at that time. Accordingly, the factual allegations in Rochon’s
complaint do not give rise to a claim of deliberate indifference
to his safety. See Neals v. Norwood, 59 F.3d 530, 533 (5th Cir.
1995); Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 837 (1994).
This appeal is without arguable merit and is thus frivolous.
Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983). We caution
Rochon that future frivolous civil suits and appeals filed by him
or on his behalf will invite the imposition of sanctions. Rochon
is cautioned further to review any pending suits and appeals to
ensure that they do not raise arguments that are frivolous.
APPEAL DISMISSED; SANCTION WARNING ISSUED. 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.