Jackson v. Lee

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 00-30990 Conference Calendar MILTON JACKSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus HARRY LEE, Sheriff; PAUL CONNICK, JR, 24th Judicial District Prosecutor, DEBORAH VILLEO, 24th Judicial District Prosecutor; LAURIE BUTLER, 24th Judicial District Prosecutor; DARLENE LEWIS, 24th Judicial District Prosecutor; ANTOINETTE ULMER; TERRY GRAFFEO; KENNETH J BECK, Esquire; MICHAEL CORONA; MICHAEL CARRONE, Defendants-Appellees. -------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana USDC No. 99-CV-2269-R -------------------- April 11, 2001 Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and JONES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Milton Jackson, Louisiana prisoner # 399323, appeals the district court’s dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. The district court concluded that Jackson was barred from bringing his claims by Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994), and its progeny, because Jackson had not shown that his conviction * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. 00-30990 -2- had been invalidated or called into question. The district court also concluded the complaint should be dismissed because two defendants were entitled to absolute witness immunity and one defendant was a nonstate actor not alleged to have engaged in a conspiracy with state actors. Jackson has not addressed or responded to the reasons for judgment stated by the district court in its dismissal of his complaint. He thus has failed to brief these issues, and they are waived. See Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222 (5th Cir. 1993); Fed. R. App. P. 28(a)(9). Because he has waived the only appropriate issues on appeal, his appeal is dismissed as frivolous. See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983); 5th Cir. R. 42.2. APPEAL DISMISSED AS FRIVOLOUS; 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.