IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-11258
Conference Calendar
L. T. RUNELS,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
D.L. KEESEE,
Sheriff of Lubbock County Texas,
Defendant-Appellee.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 5:97-CV-262-C
- - - - - - - - - -
August 18, 1998
Before KING, HIGGINBOTHAM, and JONES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
L.T. Runels, Texas prisoner # 707445, appeals the district
court’s dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action as malicious and
repetitive pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. Runels argues on appeal
that, being a layman in the law, his first filing of this § 1983
action was dismissed without prejudice because he did not know
what to file or how to file. He alleges that he was assisted by
a writ writer in filing this second suit to correct the errors of
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 97-11258
-2-
the first suit. He states that in this second filing, he has
clearly shown a constitutional violation.
We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion
and find no reversible error. Runels v. Keesee, No. 5:97-CV-262-
C (N.D. Tex. Oct. 15, 1997). Contrary to appellant’s assertion,
the record of the prior action shows that the suit was dismissed
with prejudice as frivolous. We further find that Runels’ appeal
is without arguable merit, and we DISMISS IT AS FRIVOLOUS. See
Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983); 5th Cir. R.
42.2.
Runels is hereby put on notice that the dismissal of this
appeal as frivolous constitutes his third strike under the PLRA
and that he may not proceed IFP in any civil action or appeal
filed while he is in prison unless he “is under imminent danger
of serious physical injury.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g); Adepegba v.
Hammons, 103 F.3d 383, 388 (5th Cir. 1997).
APPEAL DISMISSED AS FRIVOLOUS.