Case ID: f-appx_95/html/0097-01.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

Willie G. DEBOSE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Sir Clyde LAIN, II, Defendant-Appellee.
    No. 03-30800.
    Conference Calendar
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    April 20, 2004.
    Willie G. DeBose, Bastrop, LA, pro se. Sir Clyde Lain, II, Monroe, LA, pro se.
    Before JOLLY, JONES, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Willie G. DeBose appeals the district court’s dismissal of his petition for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1332. He asserts that the state court’s rejection of his legal malpractice claim violated his constitutional rights. This is an insufficient basis for federal-question jurisdiction and DeBose has suggested no other jurisdictional basis. See Liedtke v. State Bar of Texas, 18 F.3d 315, 317 (5th Cir.1994). As the parties are not diverse, see 28 U.S.C. § 1332, the district court did not err in dismissing DeBose’s petition for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

DeBose has failed to raise an issue of arguable merit. His appeal is therefore dismissed as frivolous. See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir.1983). The filing of frivolous appeals in the future could subject DeBose to sanctions.

DeBose’s motion to accept for filing exhibits to his brief is hereby DENIED.

APPEAL DISMISSED; SANCTION WARNING ISSUED; MOTION DENIED. 
      
       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.