Case ID: f-appx_92/html/0094-01.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

Michael Corleon DESOUZANETO, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Monte CARROLL; Eduardo Arroyos; Angel Santiago, Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 03-50839.
    Summary Calendar
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    March 24, 2004.
    Michael Corleon Desouzaneto, Andersonville, TN, pro se.
    Cynthia L. Alexander, Office of the Attorney General, Austin, TX, for Defendant-Appellees.
    Before JONES, BENAVIDES, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Former Texas prisoner, Michael Desouzaneto, has appealed the district court’s denial of his motion for appointment of counsel in a civil rights case; however, we note that Desouzaneto has not appealed the district court’s subsequent entry of summary judgment in favor of the defendants. We have jurisdiction under Article III of the Constitution only when there is an actual case or controversy at the time we decide an appeal. United States Parole Comm’n v. Geraghty, 445 U.S. 388, 396, 100 S.Ct. 1202, 63 L.Ed.2d 479 (1980); Ruiz v. Johnson, 178 F.3d 385, 389 (5th Cir.1999). In this case, we lack appellate jurisdiction because no effective relief is available to Desouzaneto. Vieux Carre Property Owners v. Brown, 948 F.2d 1436, 1446 (5th Cir.1991).

APPEAL DISMISSED. 
      
       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
     
      
       We note that the coherency of Desouzaneto’s appellate briefing and his pleadings in the district court reassure us that his ability to present his civil rights claims was not foreclosed by the district court’s denial of counsel. Robbins v. Maggio, 750 F.2d 405, 412-13 (5th Cir.1985).