United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit

No. 19-50856

Summary Calendar

Rosa Serrano, 

Plaintiff—Appellant,

versus

Ann Crawford-McClure, Chief Justice Eight Court of Appeals; 

Jaime Esparza, District Attorney; Jesus Herrera, Criminal County 

Court at Law; Steven Hughes, Eleventh Court of Appeals; Virgil 

Mulanax, County Court of Law #7; Gina Palafox, Justice Eight 

Court of Appeals; Yvonne Rodriguez, Justice Eight Court of Appeals; 

Richard Wiles, Sheriff, El Paso County; Stephen Ables, Regional 

Administrative Judge District Six; Luis Aguilar, 243rd District Court for 

Texas, 

Defendants—Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 6:19-CV-336

Before Clement, Higginson, and Engelhardt, Circuit Judges.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

March 17, 2021

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 19-50856 Document: 00515785242 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/17/2021
No. 19-50856

2

Per Curiam:*

Rosa Serrano, Texas prisoner # 2151723, filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 

complaint against numerous defendants, challenging two state criminal 

contempt orders and her state Medicaid fraud conviction. The district court 

dismissed her complaint for failure to state a claim under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e). 

Serrano reasserts her claims and argues that the criminal contempt orders 

and her Medicaid fraud conviction were void due to violations of her 

constitutional rights; the state courts lacked jurisdiction because she 

removed the state criminal cases to federal court; and the appellees were not 

entitled to immunity due to their misconduct.

On appeal, Serrano makes numerous arguments but has not identified 

any error in the district court’s reasons for dismissing her claims for failure 

to state a claim under § 1915(e). When an appellant fails to identify any error 

in the district court’s analysis, it is the same as if the appellant had not 

appealed the issue. Brinkmann v. Dallas County Deputy Sheriff Abner, 813 

F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987). Although pro se briefs are afforded liberal 

construction, Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972), even pro se litigants 

must brief arguments to preserve them, Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 224–

25 (5th Cir. 1993). Thus, Serrano has abandoned any argument that the 

district court erred in dismissing her complaint for failure to state a claim.

See Brinkmann, 813 F.2d at 748; see also United States v. Whitfield, 590 F.3d 

325, 346 (5th Cir. 2009). Accordingly, the district court’s judgment is 

AFFIRMED. Serrano’s motion to appoint counsel and to abate the appeal 

* 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: 19-50856 Document: 00515785242 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/17/2021
No. 19-50856

3

is DENIED. Her motion to suspend the collection of appeal fees is also

DENIED.

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

claim evidently counts as a strike under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Serrano is 

ADVISED that if she accumulates three strikes, she will not be able to 

proceed in forma pauperis in any civil action or appeal filed while she is 

incarcerated or detained in any facility unless she is under imminent danger 

of serious physical injury. See id.

Case: 19-50856 Document: 00515785242 Page: 3 Date Filed: 03/17/2021