United States v. Michael Davis

Case: 10-10095 Document: 00511269791 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/21/2010 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED October 21, 2010 No. 10-10095 Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus MICHAEL ANTHONY DAVIS, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas No. 4:05-CR-111-2 Before DAVIS, SMITH, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Michael Davis, federal prisoner # 33896-177, moves for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) on appeal from the denial of his second 18 U.S.C. * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR .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. Case: 10-10095 Document: 00511269791 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/21/2010 No. 10-10095 § 3582(c)(2) motion to reduce the sentence imposed following his conviction of conspiracy to possess and distribute cocaine and distribution of cocaine. His mo- tion was based on the amended sentencing guidelines for crack cocaine offenses. His first § 3582(c)(2) motion, which was based on the same grounds, was denied in 2008, because his sentencing range remained unchanged under the amended guidelines. The district court denied the instant § 3582(c)(2) motion for the same rea- sons and denied the IFP motion because Davis had failed to present a good faith issue for appeal. By moving to proceed IFP on appeal, Davis is challenging the district court’s determination. See Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 202 (5th Cir. 1997); F ED. R. A PP. P. 24(a)(5). Davis has failed to brief any issues challenging the certification that his appeal is taken in bad faith, see Brinkmann v. Dallas Cnty. Deputy Sheriff Ab- ner, 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987), and he has not demonstrated that his ap- peal involves legal points arguable on the merits, see Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir. 1983). Accordingly, the IFP motion is DENIED. This court may sua sponte dismiss an appeal pursuant to Fifth Circuit Rule 42.2 if “the merits are so intertwined with the certification decision as to constitute the same issue” and it is apparent that the appeal would lack merit. Baugh, 117 F.3d at 202 & n.24. Because Davis has failed to brief his challenge to the certification, and it is apparent that an appeal would lack merit, the ap- peal is DISMISSED as frivolous. See id. 2