United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT July 20, 2004
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 03-51242
Summary Calendar
CLENTIS L. TURNER,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
RAUL ANGUIANO; RAUL CAHILL; PAUL WEATHERBY,
Captain; ENRIQUE DEANDA; LAURA HILLEMEYER;
A. DOMINGUEZ,
Defendants-Appellees.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. P-03-CV-2
--------------------
Before JOLLY, DAVIS, and WIENER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Clentis L. Turner, Texas prisoner #498120, appeals the
district court’s denial of his motion to proceed in forma
pauperis (IFP) and certification that his appeal would not be
taken in good faith. See Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 202 (5th
Cir. 1997). Turner argues that the district court
mischaracterized his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint as challenging
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 03-51242
-2-
his disciplinary hearing and that he alleged facts sufficient to
support his claims of deliberate indifference and verbal abuse by
prison employees. Turner has abandoned any argument he had
concerning his disciplinary proceeding. See Yohey v. Collins,
985 F.2d 222, 224-25 (5th Cir. 1993).
The district court dismissed Turner’s Eighth Amendment
claims as frivolous and for failure to state a claim under 28
U.S.C. § 1915(e). Turner has failed to raise a nonfrivolous
issue for appeal with respect to the dismissal of his deliberate
indifference and verbal abuse claims. See Bender v. Brumley, 1
F.3d 271, 274 n.4 (5th Cir. 1993); Mendoza v. Lynaugh, 989 F.2d
191, 193 (5th Cir. 1993).
Turner’s request for IFP status is DENIED, and his appeal
is DISMISSED as frivolous. See Baugh, 117 F.3d at 202 & n.24;
5TH CIR. R. 42.2. The dismissal of this appeal and the district
court’s dismissal of this lawsuit as frivolous count as two
strikes for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Adepegba v.
Hammons, 103 F.3d 383, 388 (5th Cir. 1996). In Turner v. State
of Texas Board of Pardons, No. 03-51260, Turner was notified that
he had accumulated two strikes. Turner has therefore accumulated
four strikes, and he is barred from proceeding IFP in any civil
action or appeal brought in a United States court unless he is
under imminent danger of serious physical injury. See 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(g).
No. 03-51242
-3-
IFP DENIED; APPEAL DISMISSED AS FRIVOLOUS; SANCTIONS
IMPOSED.