IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
__________________
No. 95-50485
Summary Calendar
__________________
SYNNACHIA McQUEEN,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
CAY CANNON, State Classification Member;
C.W. MANNING, Capt.; C. BASHAM,
Unit Classification Member; JAMES A. COLLINS,
DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEP'T OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE,
INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION; JOHN DOE; JANE DOE,
Defendant-Appellee.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. W-93-CV-408
- - - - - - - - - -
February 14, 1996
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DUHE’ and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Synnachia McQueen's motion for leave to proceed in forma
pauperis (IFP) on appeal is DENIED. McQueen's motion to
disqualify the magistrate judge and district judge from presiding
over his pending cases in the district court also is DENIED.
*
Pursuant to Local Rule 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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 Local Rule
47.5.4.
No. 95-50485
-2-
McQueen contends that the district court erred by denying
his motion for class certification; that the district court erred
by denying his motion to file a third amended complaint; that the
district court erred by granting summary judgment for the
defendants and denying summary judgment for him; and that the
district court erred by finding the defendants entitled to
qualified immunity. We have reviewed the record of the district
court and McQueen's appellate brief and we find no nonfrivolous
issue on appeal.
Regarding McQueen's claim that he was denied due process
when his review committees maintained him in administrative
segregation, continued confinement in administrative segregation
does not violate the Due Process Clause. Pichardo v. Kinker,
___ F.3d ___, slip op. at 1505-06 (5th Cir. Jan. 31, 1996, No.
95-40413). The effect of confinement on administrative
segregation on parole opportunities does not implicate due
process. Luken v. Scott, 71 F.2d 192, 193-94 (5th Cir. 1995).
The district court did not have the benefit of the cases on which
we now rely; we may rely on grounds on which the district court
did not rely. McQueen's due process claim is frivolous. We find
McQueen's appeal of summary judgment on McQueen's retaliation and
racial discrimination claims frivolous for the reasons
articulated by the district court.
Finally, McQueen has been warned that frivolous appeals may
result in sanctions against him. Accordingly, McQueen is barred
from filing any pro se, in forma pauperis civil appeal in this
No. 95-50485
-3-
court, or any pro se, in forma pauperis initial civil pleading in
any court which is subject to this court's jurisdiction, without
the advance written permission of a judge of the forum court or
of this court; the clerk of this court and the clerks of all
federal district courts in this Circuit are directed to return to
McQueen, unfiled, any attempted submission inconsistent with this
bar.
APPEAL DISMISSED. 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.