IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
__________________
No. 95-40686
Conference Calendar
__________________
KENNETH WAYNE McCULLOUGH,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
T.A. SHARP, Disciplinary Captain;
J.B. BARNHART, CO III; V. HESTER,
Sub Counsel, ROBERT J. PARKER, Warden,
Defendants-Appellees.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Texas
USDC No. 6:93-CV-300
- - - - - - - - - -
April 19, 1996
Before DUHÉ, DeMOSS, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Kenneth Wayne McCullough appeals the dismissal of his civil
rights complaint as frivolous pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d).
He contends that the district court deprived him of access to the
courts, deprived him of equal protection, and denied him the
right to a jury trial by dismissing his complaint as frivolous.
The district court did not deprive McCullough of his ability
to prepare or transmit legal documents; the district court did
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 95-40686
-2-
not violate McCullough's right of access to the courts. Brewer
v. Wilkinson, 3 F.3d 816, 821 (5th Cir. 1993), cert. denied, 114
S. Ct. 1081 (1994). The dismissal of McCullough's complaint as
frivolous did not single him out for disparate treatment on the
basis of his poverty; the district court did not violate
McCullough's right to equal protection. See Lavernia v. Lynaugh,
845 F.2d 493, 496 (5th Cir. 1988). By dismissing McCullough's
complaint as frivolous, the district court determined that
McCullough's complaint lacked basis in law or in fact; no facts
remained in dispute for a jury to determine. See Plaisance v.
Phelps, 845 F.2d 107, 108 (5th Cir. 1988). The district court
did not deny McCullough the right to a jury trial.
We caution McCullough that any additional frivolous appeals
filed by him or on his behalf will invite the imposition of
sanctions. To avoid sanctions, McCullough is further cautioned
to review any pending appeals to ensure that they do not raise
arguments that are frivolous because they have been previously
decided by this court.
APPEAL DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2. SANCTION WARNING
ISSUED.