IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-40543
Conference Calendar
JUAN JORGE SANCHEZ,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
ORLANDO PEREZ; ET AL.,
Defendants,
DAVID STOCKLEY; SAUL CRUZ; MARTHA VILLAREAL,
Defendants-Appellees.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. C-94-CV-180
- - - - - - - - - -
December 15, 1999
Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Juan Jorge Sanchez, a Texas prisoner (# 577512), appeals the
magistrate judge’s April 13, 1999, order denying his motion for
relief from judgment, filed pursuant to FED. R. CIV. P. 60(b).
Sanchez argues that, in dismissing his civil rights claims
against three remaining defendants based on the qualified-
immunity doctrine, the magistrate judge erred in failing to
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 99-40543
-2-
consider the requirements of Hudson v. McMillian, 503 U.S. 1
(1992). Sanchez is essentially arguing that the magistrate judge
committed a legal error, or a “mistake” under Rule 60(b)(1). A
motion under Rule 60(b)(1) must be brought within one year after
the judgment or order to be challenged is entered. See Rule
60(b). Sanchez’s Rule 60(b) motion was not filed until April
1999, when the judgment he is challenging was entered in October
1997. Not only did the magistrate judge did not abuse her
discretion in denying Sanchez’s Rule 60(b) motion, see Carimi v.
Royal Carribean Cruise Line, Inc., 959 F.2d 1344, 1345 (5th Cir.
1992), but Sanchez’s appeal is frivolous. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.
Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED.
For purposes of the “three-strikes” provision, 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(g), Sanchez had already accumulated at least four strikes
prior to the issuance of the instant opinion. See Sanchez v.
Biery, No. 98-50423 (5th Cir. Aug. 25, 1999); Sanchez v. T. West,
No. 97-40940 (5th Cir. June 16, 1998); Sanchez v. Putska, No. 95-
20917 (5th Cir. March 1, 1996). We dispose of the instant appeal
on the merits because the Biery opinion, No. 98-50423, was issued
after Sanchez had filed the instant appeal.
The instant dismissal counts as an additional strike.
Accordingly, Sanchez is again notified that he may not proceed in
forma pauperis in any civil action or appeal filed while he is
incarcerated or detained in any facility unless he is under
imminent danger of serious physical injury. See § 1915(g).
APPEAL DISMISSED. 5TH CIR. R. 42.2. SANCTION IMPOSED UNDER
28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).