IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-20687

OVERILLE DENTON THOMPSON, JR.,

Plaintiff-Appellant

v.

SUSAN BROWN,

Defendant-Appellee

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:15-CV-3025

Before JOLLY, DAVIS, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Overille Denton Thompson, Jr., Texas prisoner #02425321, moves for 

leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) in this appeal from the district court’s 

dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. The district court dismissed 

Thompson’s complaint as frivolous and for failure to state a claim pursuant to 

28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B) and 1915A(b).

By moving to proceed IFP, Thompson is challenging the district court’s 

certification that this appeal was not taken in good faith. See Baugh v. Taylor, 

 

* 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

FILED

February 2, 2017

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 15-20687 Document: 00513860799 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/02/2017
No. 15-20687

2

117 F.3d 197, 202 (5th Cir. 1997). Our inquiry into an appellant’s good faith 

“is limited to whether the appeal involves legal points arguable on their merits 

(and therefore not frivolous).” Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir. 

1983) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).

Thompson argues that he was unlawfully confined because Judge Susan 

Brown refused to obey a writ of habeas corpus and that Judge Brown deprived 

him of the opportunity to full and fair litigation. He also contends that Judge 

Brown was not entitled to judicial immunity. 

A judge is absolutely immune from a suit for damages except for actions 

not taken in a judicial capacity or actions taken in the absence of all 

jurisdiction. Mireles v. Waco, 502 U.S. 9, 11-12 (1991). In other words, a trial 

judge enjoys absolute immunity for actions taken in the course of his judicial 

function unless they were nonjudicial or performed with no jurisdiction. Boyd 

v. Biggers, 31 F.3d 279, 284-85 (5th Cir. 1994). The district court did not err 

in determining that Judge Brown was entitled to absolute judicial immunity. 

See Boyd, 31 F.3d at 284-85; Mireles, 502 U.S. at 11-12. Thompson therefore 

has not shown that he will raise a nonfrivolous issue on appeal. Accordingly, 

his motion for leave to proceed IFP on appeal is denied, and his appeal is 

dismissed as frivolous. See Baugh, 117 F.3d at 202 & n.24; 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

The dismissal of this appeal as frivolous counts as a strike under 

§ 1915(g). See Coleman v. Tollefson, 135 S. Ct. 1759, 1763 (2015); Adepegba v. 

Hammons, 103 F.3d 383, 387-88 (5th Cir. 1996). In addition, Thompson 

accumulated two other strikes in Thompson v. Nicholas, No. 4:15-cv-03020 

(S.D. Tex. Oct. 15, 2015) and Thompson v. Anderson, No. 4:15-cv-03019 (S.D. 

Tex. Oct. 15, 2015). Thus, Thompson has now accumulated at least three 

strikes. Thompson therefore is barred from proceeding IFP in any civil action 

 Case: 15-20687 Document: 00513860799 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/02/2017
No. 15-20687

3

or appeal while incarcerated or detained in any facility unless he is under 

imminent danger of serious physical injury. See § 1915(g). 

IFP DENIED: APPEAL DISMISSED; 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) BAR IMPOSED.

 Case: 15-20687 Document: 00513860799 Page: 3 Date Filed: 02/02/2017