UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FIFTH CIRCUIT
_________________
No. 97-51021
(Summary Calendar)
_________________
THOMAS DAVID GIPSON,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
KENNETH CALLAHAN, Policeman for the City of
Midland Police Department; MARVIN L MOORE,
Judge, County Court as Law #2; ALVIN WALVROOD,
JR, Judge, County Court as Law #1; RUSSELL W
MALM, Midland County Attorney; ROBERT STEVENS,
Assistant Midland County Attorney; JAKE
USSERY, Bailiff for Midland County; GEORGE D
GILLES, Judge, 142nd Judicial District,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
(MO-97-CV-160)
August 25, 1998
Before EMILIO M. GARZA, DeMOSS, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Thomas David Gipson appeals the district court’s dismissal for
failure to state a claim of his complaint alleging various civil
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
rights, constitutional, and statutory violations. Having reviewed
the record and the briefs of the parties, we DISMISS the appeal as
FRIVOLOUS.
Gipson asks this court to strike the brief filed by appellees
Moore, Walvoord, Malm, Stevens, and Ussery; enjoin various state
court judges not named in the complaint “to completely cease and
desist all action” against Gipson; and strike pleadings filed by
counsel for defendant Callahan and impose sanctions because counsel
has spelled Gipson’s name and the names of other parties “in all
capital letters.” The motions are DENIED.
Gipson’s “Emergency Petition and Demand for Writ of Habeas
Corpus” and “Demand for Judicial Notice,” challenging April 1998
state court orders revoking Gipson’s release on a personal
recognizance bond and setting his bail at $4000 are DENIED.
Gipson’s pleadings provide no indication that he has sought relief
in the state courts or that state process is unavailable or
inadequate to protect his rights. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b)(1).
This appeal is frivolous. It is DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R.
42.2. We caution Gipson that any additional frivolous appeals
filed by him or on his behalf will invite the imposition of
sanctions. To avoid sanctions, Gipson is further cautioned to
review any pending appeals to ensure that they do not raise
arguments that are frivolous.
APPEAL DISMISSED; MOTIONS DENIED; 28 U.S.C. § 2254 RELIEF
DENIED; SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.
-2-