United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit

No. 21-30455

Carnell Morris, 

Plaintiff—Appellant,

versus

James M. LeBlanc, Secretary, Department of Public Safety and 

Corrections; Kirt Guerin, Warden, Elayn Hunt Correctional Center; 

Jason Russ, Colonel of Elayn Hunt Correctional Center; Unknown 

Jones, Master Sergeant, Employee of Elayn Hunt Correctional Center; 

Unknown Kirk, Sergeant, Employee of Elayn Hunt Correctional Center; 

Unknown Rasheen, Captain, Employee of Elayn Hunt Correctional 

Center; Unknown Smith, EMT, Employee of Elayn Hunt Correctional 

Center; John Doe, EMT, Employee of Elayn Hunt Correctional Center, 

Defendants—Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Middle District of Louisiana

USDC No. 3:19-CV-119

Before Jones, Elrod, and Wilson, Circuit Judges.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

April 12, 2022

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 21-30455 Document: 00516277416 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/12/2022
No. 21-30455

2

Per Curiam:*

Carnell Morris, Louisiana prisoner # 100116, moves for leave to 

proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) on appeal from the district court’s dismissal 

of his complaint raising claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and state law for 

failure to state a claim, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915A and 1915(e)(2)(B). 

By such motion, Morris is challenging the district court’s certification that 

any appeal would not be taken in good faith. See Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 

197, 202 (5th Cir. 1997). 

Before this court, Morris argues that he is financially eligible to 

proceed IFP, and he conclusionally states that his appeal is brought in good 

faith because his constitutional rights were violated. However, he briefs no 

argument challenging the district court’s reasons for concluding that he

failed to state a claim for relief, for declining to exercise supplemental 

jurisdiction over state law claims, and for denying him leave to amend the 

complaint. His failure to identify any error in the district court’s analysis 

constitutes an abandonment of such claims. See Brinkmann v. Dallas Cnty. 

Deputy Sheriff Abner, 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987). The appeal is without 

arguable merit and is thus frivolous. See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 220 

(5th Cir. 1983). Because the appeal is frivolous, the motion to proceed IFP is 

DENIED, and the appeal is DISMISSED. See Baugh, 117 F.3d at 202 & 

n.24; 5th Cir. R. 42.2.

The district court’s dismissal of the complaint for failure to state 

a claim and the dismissal as frivolous of this appeal each count as a strike for 

purposes of § 1915(g). See Adepegba v. Hammons, 103 F.3d 383, 388 (5th Cir. 

1996), abrogated in part on other grounds by Coleman v. Tollefson, 575 U.S. 532, 

537 (2015). Morris is WARNED that if he accumulates three strikes, he will 

* Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 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 Circuit Rule 47.5.4.

Case: 21-30455 Document: 00516277416 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/12/2022
No. 21-30455

3

no longer be allowed to 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 § 1915(g). 

Case: 21-30455 Document: 00516277416 Page: 3 Date Filed: 04/12/2022