IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-10618

TYRON ALAN MCGARRAH,

Plaintiff-Appellant

v.

BOB ALFORD; EDDIE WILLIAMS; JIMMY JOHNSON; RODNEY COOPER; 

BRANDON WOOD,

Defendants-Appellees

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:14-CV-1125

Before DENNIS, SOUTHWICK, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Tyron Alan McGarrah, Texas prisoner # 01936601, moves to proceed in 

forma pauperis (IFP) in his appeal of the district court’s dismissal of his 42 

U.S.C. § 1983 complaint, in which he alleged that he was denied access to a 

law library and therefore was deprived of his constitutional right of access to 

the courts. The district court dismissed McGarrah’s complaint as frivolous 

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). The district court also denied 

* 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

April 17, 2015

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 

 Case: 14-10618 Document: 00513009388 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/17/2015
No. 14-10618

McGarrah’s motion for leave to proceed IFP on appeal, certifying that the 

appeal was frivolous and not taken in good faith. 

By moving in this court for leave to proceed IFP, McGarrah is 

challenging the district court’s certification decision. See Baugh v. Taylor, 117 

F.3d 197, 202 (5th Cir. 1997). An appeal is taken in good faith if it raises legal 

points that are arguable on the merits and thus nonfrivolous. Howard v. King, 

707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir. 1983). Although McGarrah contends that he is 

being denied access to legal research materials, he fails to address the district 

court’s finding that “[s]ince Plaintiff is represented by counsel, he has failed to 

state a claim for denial of access to the courts.” By failing to provide argument 

that addresses the basis of the district court’s dismissal, McGarrah has failed 

to adequately present any argument for this court’s consideration. He has thus 

failed to establish that he will raise a nonfrivolous issue for appeal.

McGarrah’s appeal is without arguable merit and therefore is frivolous. 

See Howard, 707 F.2d at 219-20. Because the appeal is frivolous, it is 

dismissed. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2. The dismissal of this appeal as frivolous 

counts as a strike under § 1915(g), as does the district court’s dismissal as 

frivolous. See § 1915(g); Adepegba v. Hammons, 103 F.3d 383, 387-88 (5th Cir. 

1996). Additionally, McGarrah accumulated two strikes in other proceedings 

in which he filed § 1983 complaints that were dismissed by the district court 

as frivolous. See McGarrah v. Williams, No. 3:14-CV-1119-M, 2014 WL 

4696015, at *1 (N.D. Tex. Sept. 18, 2014) (unpublished); McGarrah v. 

Kimbrow, No. 3:14-CV-2088-B-BK, 2015 WL 105228, at *1 (N.D. Tex. Jan. 6, 

2015) (unpublished). Accordingly, McGarrah has accumulated more than 

three strikes and is now barred from proceeding 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).

2

 Case: 14-10618 Document: 00513009388 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/17/2015
No. 14-10618

IFP DENIED; APPEAL DISMISSED AS FRIVOLOUS; 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) 

BAR IMPOSED.

3

 Case: 14-10618 Document: 00513009388 Page: 3 Date Filed: 04/17/2015