IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-30461
Conference Calendar
BEN ALAN SNIPES,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
CHARLES COOK, Sheriff Ouachita Parish;
TURNER, Captain, Warden Ouachita Parish Jail,
Defendants-Appellees.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Louisiana
USDC No. 98-CV-642
--------------------
February 16, 2000
Before EMILIO M. GARZA, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Ben Alan Snipes (#532325), proceeding pro se and in forma
pauperis (IFP), appeals the district court’s dismissal as
frivolous of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. Snipes’ request for
consolidation of the instant appeal with No. 98-30737 is DENIED
as moot.
Although a pretrial detainee may not be subjected to
conditions of confinement that constitute punishment, Hamilton v.
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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. 99-30461
-2-
Lyons, 74 F.3d 99, 103 (5th Cir. 1996)(citing Bell v. Wolfish,
441 U.S. 520, 535 (1979), negligent inaction does not trigger the
protections of the Due Process Clause. See Davidson v. Cannon,
474 U.S. 344, 348 (1986). Snipes did not allege or produce
evidence that the appellees acted with punitive intent. Snipes’
allegations do not state a constitutional violation. See
Davidson, 474 U.S. at 348. Snipes’ allegations that the
appellees threatened him do not state a constitutional violation.
See Bender v. Brumley, 1 F.3d 271, 274 n.4 (5th Cir. 1993)
(pretrial detainee)(allegations of verbal abuse and threats by
prison officials do not state a claim under § 1983).
Accordingly, we AFFIRM the district court’s judgment on alternate
grounds. See Bickford v. Int’l Speedway, 654 F.2d 1028, 131 (5th
Cir. 1981).
Snipes now has five strikes. See Snipes v. Cook, No. 98-
30737 (5th Cir. Sept. 3, 1999); Adepegba v. Hammons, 103 F.3d
383, 387 (5th Cir. 1996)(affirmance of district court’s dismissal
as frivolous counts as a single strike). Except for cases
involving an imminent danger of serious physical injury, Snipes
is BARRED under § 1915(g) from proceeding further under 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915.
AFFIRMED; 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) BAR ORDERED; MOTION TO
CONSOLIDATE APPEALS DENIED.