Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-almd-2_04-cv-01125/USCOURTS-almd-2_04-cv-01125-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)

---

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA 

NORTHERN DIVISION

ANTHONY UPSHAW, #217543, )

)

Petitioner, )

) CASE NO. 2:04-cv-1125-WKW

v. ) [wo]

)

BILLY MITCHEM, et al. )

)

Respondents. )

ORDER

This cause is before the court on the petitioner’s Motion for Leave to Proceed on Appeal in

Forma Pauperis (Doc. # 45).

 “An appeal may not be taken in forma pauperis if the trial court certifies in writing that it

is not taken in good faith.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3). In making this determination as to good faith,

a court must use an objective standard, such as whether the appeal is “frivolous.” Coppedge v.

United States, 369 U.S. 438, 445 (1962). “The statute provides that a court ‘may dismiss the case

if the allegation of poverty is untrue, or if satisfied that the action is frivolous or malicious.’”

Attwood v. Singletary, 105 F.3d 610, 613 (11th Cir. 1997) (quoting 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d) (1996)). 

This circuit has defined a frivolous appeal under section 1915(d) as

being one “‘without arguable merit.’” Harris v. Menendez, 817 F.2d

737, 739 (11th Cir.1987)(quoting Watson v. Ault, 525 F.2d 886, 892

(5th Cir.1976)). “‘Arguable means capable of being convincingly

argued.’” Moreland v. Wharton, 899 F.2d 1168, 1170 (11th

Cir.1990) (per curiam) (quoting Menendez, 817 F.2d at 740 n. 5); see

Clark, 915 F.2d at 639 (“A lawsuit [under section 1915(d)] is

frivolous if the ‘plaintiff's realistic chances of ultimate success are

slight.’” (quoting Moreland, 899 F.2d at 1170)). 

Sun v. Forrester, 939 F.2d 924, 925 (11th Cir. 1991), reh’g denied, 503 U.S. 999 (1992); see also

Weeks v. Jones, 100 F.3d 124, 127 (11th Cir. 1996) (stating that “[f]actual allegations are frivolous

Case 2:04-cv-01125-WKW-TFM Document 47 Filed 08/09/07 Page 1 of 2
2

for purpose of § 1915(d) when they are ‘clearly baseless;’ legal theories are frivolous when they are

‘indisputably meritless’” (citations omitted)).

Applying the foregoing standard, this court is of the opinion that the petitioner’s appeal is

without a legal or factual basis and, accordingly, is frivolous and not taken in good faith. 

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the plaintiff’s motion is DENIED. The appeal in this case

is certified, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a), as not taken in good faith. 

DONE this 9th day of August, 2007.

 /s/ W. Keith Watkins 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:04-cv-01125-WKW-TFM Document 47 Filed 08/09/07 Page 2 of 2