IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 98-41118
Conference Calendar
WILLIAM PEÑA,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
UNKNOWN QUACKENBUSH, Dr., ET AL.,
Defendants-Appellees.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. G-97-CV-620
- - - - - - - - - -
April 19, 1999
Before JONES, SMITH, and DUHÉ, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
William Peña, Texas inmate # 619877, appeals the district
court’s dismissal as frivolous of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint.
Peña contended in the district court that he was treated
unnecessarily with drugs for a mental illness when his condition
required treatment only for epileptic seizures. Peña contended
that his condition deteriorated as a result of the drug treatment
and eventually required hospitalization for dehydration.
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 98-41118
-2-
We have reviewed the record and Peña’s brief and affirm the
decision of the district court under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A for
essentially the reasons stated by the district court. See Peña
v. Quackenbush et al., No. G-97-620 (S.D. Tex. Jul. 20, 1998).
Peña contends for the first time in this court that the
defendants forcibly administered psychotropic drugs. Peña’s
allegation involves factual issues, which were capable of
resolution by the district court, and which cannot rise to the
level of plain error. See United States v. Vital, 68 F.3d 114,
119 (5th Cir. 1995); Gabel v. Lynaugh, 835 F.2d 124, 125 (5th
Cir. 1988)(“Generally speaking, we are a court of errors and
appeals; and the trial court cannot have erred as to matters
which were not presented to it.”). Accordingly, the decision of
the district court is AFFIRMED.
AFFIRMED.