Case ID: f-appx_621/html/0764-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM: \n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Jimmy DIAZ, Plaintiff-Appellant v. Police Chief Mark WICKER; Officer Anderson Brandon; Sergeant Jesse Garza, Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 14-40292
    Summary Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    March 27, 2015.
    Before PRADO, OWEN, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Jimmy Diaz, Texas prisoner # 1737301, appeals the dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. The district court dismissed Diaz’s § 1983 complaint with prejudice as barred by the three-strikes provision in 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).

Diaz does not address in his opening brief whether the district court erred in dismissing his complaint pursuant to § 1915(g). Even if we construe his pleading entitled “Affidavit Relating To Previous Filings” as a timely filed reply brief, this does not help Diaz. Although we ordinarily do not consider arguments raised for the first time in a reply brief, see United States v. Transocean Deepwater Drilling, Inc., 767 F.3d 485, 492 (5th Cir.2014), we have done so in the instant case in light of Diaz’s pro se status and in the interests of justice. Diaz’s arguments do not show that the district court erred in imposing the § 1915(g) bar and dismissing his complaint.

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. Diaz’s motion for appointment of counsel is DENIED. See Jackson v. Dallas Police Dep’t, 811 F.2d 260, 261 (5th Cir.1986). 
      
       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.