Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-03-51001/USCOURTS-ca5-03-51001-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 

---

* 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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

January 28, 2004

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 03-51001

Summary Calendar

 

JAMES MONTANYA, JR.,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

FRANK D. HOKE, Program Administrator; JANIE L. MUNIZ,

Law Librarian II,

Defendants-Appellees.

--------------------

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. W-02-CV-325

--------------------

Before SMITH, DeMOSS, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

James Montanya, Jr., Texas prisoner # 593707, filed a

civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging that prison

officials had denied him access to the courts by confiscating

his “legal locker box.” Citing 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915A(b)(1) and

1915(e)(2)(B)(ii), the district court dismissed the complaint

for failure to state a claim. Alternatively, the district court 

determined that Montanya was barred from proceeding in forma

pauperis (“IFP”) by the three-strikes provision of 28 U.S.C.

 Case: 03-51001 Document: 0051546752 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/28/2004
2

§ 1915(g). By moving for leave to proceed IFP, Montanya is

challenging the district court’s certification that IFP should not

be granted on appeal because his appeal is not taken in good faith.

See Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 202 (5th Cir. 1997).

Montanya has not made a meritorious challenge to the district

court’s denial of IFP and has not shown that he will raise a

nonfrivolous issue on appeal with respect to the district court’s

dismissal of his complaint for failure to state a claim. See 28

U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3). Montanya’s request for IFP status is DENIED,

and his appeal is DISMISSED as frivolous. See Baugh, 117 F.3d at

202 & n.24; 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

Montanya has previously accumulated two strikes for purposes

of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). See Montanya v. Easley, No. 01-50086 (5th

Cir. May 25, 2001). The district court’s dismissal of his

complaint in this case for failure to state a claim and this

court’s dismissal of Montanya’s appeal each count as a “strike”

under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). See Adepegba v. Hammons, 103 F.3d 383,

388 (5th Cir. 1996). Montanya may no longer proceed IFP in any

civil action or appeal filed while he is incarcerated or detained

in any facility unless he is under imminent danger of serious

physical injury. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).

MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS DENIED; APPEAL DISMISSED;

28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) SANCTIONS IMPOSED.

 Case: 03-51001 Document: 0051546752 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/28/2004