[DO NOT PUBLISH]

In the

United States Court of Appeals

For the Eleventh Circuit

____________________

No. 23-12396

Non-Argument Calendar

____________________

MOHAMMAD SHARIFI, 

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF MADISON COUNTY,

Defendant-Appellee.

____________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Alabama

D.C. Docket No. 1:23-cv-00157-KD-B

____________________

USCA11 Case: 23-12396 Document: 19-1 Date Filed: 05/08/2024 Page: 1 of 3
2 Opinion of the Court 23-12396

Before JILL PRYOR, NEWSOM, and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Mohammad Sharifi, an Alabama state prisoner proceeding 

pro se, appeals the sua sponte dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint as frivolous and malicious under 28 U.S.C. 

§§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(i), 1915A(b)(1). After careful review, we affirm. 

Because the facts are known to the parties, we repeat them here 

only as necessary to decide the case.

We hold pro se pleadings to a less stringent standard and will 

liberally construe them. Campbell v. Air Jam. Ltd., 760 F.3d 1165, 

1168 (11th Cir. 2014). However, an appellant abandons an issue by 

failing to challenge it on appeal. See Irwin v. Hawk, 40 F.3d 347, 347 

n.1 (11th Cir. 1994) (applying this abandonment rule to a pro se litigant). An appellant also abandons an issue on appeal where he presents it only in “passing references” or “in a perfunctory manner 

without supporting arguments and authority.” Sapuppo v. Allstate 

Floridian Ins. Co., 739 F.3d 678, 681 (11th Cir. 2014). “[S]imply stating that an issue exists,” without providing reasoning and citation 

to authority that the appellant relies on, “constitutes abandonment 

of that issue.” Id. (quoting Singh v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 561 F.3d 1275, 

1278 (11th Cir. 2009)).

We may exercise our discretion to consider a forfeited issue 

if: 

(1) the issue involves a pure question of law and refusal to consider it would result in a miscarriage of 

USCA11 Case: 23-12396 Document: 19-1 Date Filed: 05/08/2024 Page: 2 of 3
23-12396 Opinion of the Court 3

justice; (2) the party lacked an opportunity to raise 

the issue at the district court level; (3) the interest of 

substantial justice is at stake; (4) the proper resolution 

is beyond any doubt; or (5) the issue presents significant questions of general impact or of great public 

concern. 

United States v. Campbell, 26 F.4th 860, 873 (11th Cir.) (en banc), cert. 

denied, 143 S. Ct. 95 (2022).

Here, Sharifi has abandoned any purported challenge to the 

district court’s dismissal of his case. Even when construing his brief 

liberally, Sharifi failed to challenge any basis of the district court’s 

dismissal of his case. See Irwin, 40 F.3d at 347 n.1; Sapuppo, 739 F.3d 

at 681. Rather than argue that he was not relitigating a pending 

case or that §§ 1915 and 1915A in any way did not apply to him, 

Sharifi simply repeats his theory that he was wronged by Broussard 

and others for their alleged improprieties related to his criminal 

conviction. Thus, Sharifi has abandoned any challenge to the district court’s dismissal of his complaint. See Irwin, 40 F.3d at 347 n.1; 

Sapuppo, 739 F.3d at 681. Although this Court may exercise its discretion to consider forfeited issues, none of the exceptions to the 

usual forfeiture rule apply to Sharifi’s appeal. See Campbell, 26 F.4th 

at 873. 

AFFIRMED.

USCA11 Case: 23-12396 Document: 19-1 Date Filed: 05/08/2024 Page: 3 of 3