United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS April 15, 2004
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 03-51383
Summary Calendar
ROBERT G. HART,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
KENNETH HAIRSTON; KARL THOMAS, Major; JIMMY D. CRAIG,
Defendants-Appellees.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. W-01-CV-151
--------------------
Before JONES, BENAVIDES, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
The district court has certified that the captioned appeal
has not been taken in good faith, pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(a)(3) and FED. R. APP. P. 24(a), and that Texas prisoner
Robert G. Hart (# 769108) should not be allowed to proceed
in forma pauperis (“IFP”) on appeal. Hart has filed a motion to
proceed IFP on appeal, a pleading which this court construes as a
motion challenging the district court’s certification decision.
See Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 202 (5th Cir. 1997).
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 03-51383
-2-
Hart avers that his case presents exceptional circumstances
because he is indigent, has no legal training, and is hindered
from investigating his case due to his incarceration in a maximum
security prison. Hart has raised legal points that are arguable
on their merits. Thus, Hart’s motion for leave to proceed IFP is
GRANTED. See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir. 1983).
However, the denial of Hart’s motion for appointment of
counsel is AFFIRMED as he has not shown exceptional circumstances
warranting the granting of such a motion. See Ulmer v.
Chancellor, 691 F.2d 209, 212 (5th Cir. 1982).
IFP GRANTED; AFFIRMED.