IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
_____________________
No. 98-10389
Summary Calendar
_____________________
ANTHONY LIONEL GIBSON,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
BILL LONG, ET AL.,
Defendants-Appellees.
_________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court for the
Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 3:97-CV-1384-H
_________________________________________________________________
September 14, 1998
Before JOLLY, SMITH, and WIENER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Anthony Lionel Gibson, Texas prisoner #695684, appeals the
district court’s dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint with
prejudice under 42 U.S.C. § 1915(e) as frivolous. We have reviewed
the record and Gibson’s brief, and find no reversible error.
Although couched in terms of civil rights violations, Gibson’s
claim arises from his state court habeas proceedings. Under the
Rooker-Feldman1 doctrine, he may not attempt to invalidate his
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
1
See Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co., 263 U.S. 413 (1923), and
District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462
(1983).
state court judgment in federal court. See Liedtke v. State Bar of
Texas, 18 F.3d 315, 317 (5th cir. 1994). Furthermore, Gibson’s
challenge to a specific state habeas proceeding fails to raise a
constitutional question cognizable in federal habeas corpus
proceedings. See Nichols v. Scott, 69 F.3d 1255, 1275 (5th Cir.
1995). Accordingly, the district court did not abuse its
discretion by dismissing Gibson’s complaint as frivolous, and the
judgment is AFFIRMED. See Sojourner T v. Edwards, 974 F.2d 27, 30
(5th Cir. 1992) (court may affirm judgment on any basis supported
by the record).
A F F I R M E D.
2