No. 99-60720
-1-
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-60720
Summary Calendar
ALBERT EDMOND,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
DAVID TURNER, Superintendent, Southern Mississippi Correctional
Institute; FLORENCE JONES, ADOS, Southern Mississippi
Correctional Institute; HUBERT JORDAN, Disciplinary Committee;
DONALD WEST, Lieutenant; JERRY WALLEY, Lieutenant; KEITH DUNNAM,
Sergeant; THOMAS MATHIAS, Sergeant; JAMES JOHNSON; REGINA
HANCOCK; TERRI KILPATRICK; JAMES ANDERSON, Commissioner; LAQUINTA
WRIGHT, Correctional Officer II, Area II; MICHAEL SUMNER,
Captain, Warden, Area II Infirmary; MARIA SERAPIO, SMCI Medical
Dir., Medical Director of Southern Mississippi Correctional
Institute,
Defendants-Appellees.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Mississippi
USDC No. 2:99-CV-134-PG
--------------------\
April 27, 2000
Before GARWOOD, HIGGINBOTHAM and WIENER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Albert Edmond, Mississippi prisoner # 30523, appeals the
district court’s dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action for
failure to state a claim pursuant to 28 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
No. 99-60720
-2-
§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). He argues that the district court erred in
dismissing his claims for denial of due process in his
disciplinary proceedings; retaliatory transfer and job
assignment; a violation of his right to privacy; failure to
train; inadequate mental health care; deliberate indifference;
and harassing statements. We have reviewed the record, the
district court's opinion, and Edmond’s brief, and we find that
the district court did not err in dismissing Edmond’s complaint
for failure to state a claim. Black v. Warren, 134 F.3d 732,
733-34 (5th Cir. 1998). Further, we hold that Edmond’s appeal is
without arguable merit and is frivolous. See Howard v. King, 707
F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983). Because the appeal is
frivolous, it is DISMISSED. See 5th Cir. R. 42.2.
Edmond is hereby informed that the dismissal of this appeal
as frivolous counts as a strike for purposes of 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(g), in addition to the strike for the district court’s
dismissal for failure to state a claim. See Adepegba v. Hammons,
103 F.3d 383, 387 (5th Cir. 1996). We caution Edmond that once
he accumulates three strikes, he may not proceed IFP 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 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).
APPEAL DISMISSED AS FRIVOLOUS.