IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 98-20327
Conference Calendar
JAMES EDWARD FLOWERS,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
JAMES A. COLLINS ET AL.,
Defendants-Appellees.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:96-CV-2130
- - - - - - - - - -
February 11, 1999
Before BARKSDALE and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.*
PER CURIAM:**
James Edwards Flowers, Texas prisoner # 588411, appeals the
district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action
for failure to state a claim pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). Flowers argues that the main legal issue in
his appeal concerns his allegations that he was denied due
process in his disciplinary proceeding. He contends that the
*
This matter is being decided by a quorum. 28 U.S.C. §
46(d).
**
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 98-20327
-2-
district court did not give him the opportunity to amend his
complaint or to conduct discovery.
Flowers’ claim of a denial of due process at the
disciplinary proceeding is not yet cognizable in a § 1983 action.
Edwards v. Balisok, 117 S. Ct. 1584, 1588-89 (1997). Thus, there
was no need for discovery or an opportunity to amend the
complaint to allege additional facts. The district court did not
err in dismissing his complaint for failure to state a claim.
Black v. Warren, 134 F.3d 732, 733-34 (5th Cir. 1998).
We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion
and find no issue of arguable merit. Accordingly, we dismiss the
appeal as frivolous. 28 U.S.C. § 1915; Howard v. King, 707 F.2d
215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983); 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.
We caution Flowers that any additional frivolous appeals
filed by him will invite the imposition of sanctions. To avoid
sanctions, Flowers is further cautioned to review any pending
appeals to ensure that they do not raise arguments that are
frivolous because they have been previously decided by this
court.
APPEAL DISMISSED AS FRIVOLOUS; SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.