FI L ED U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S EL EVENTH CI RCUI T J UL Y 15, 2011 J OHN L EY CL ERK [DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UN ITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ No. 1 0- 14 51 3 Non -Arg um en t Ca le nd ar

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ D. C. Dock et No. 4 :0 8- cv -0 01 20 -CDL

ZACHARY BOUVIER TAYLOR,

Pet it io ne r-Ap pe ll an t,

ve rs us
CYNTHIA NELSON, W ard en ,

Res po nd en t-Ap pe ll ee.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

th e Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t fo r th e Mi dd le Dis tri ct of Ge or gi a

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ (J ul y 15 , 20 11 )

Befo re EDMONDSON, MARCUS an d KRAVITC H, Circ ui t J ud ge s.

PER CURI AM:Za c h a ry Bo uv ie r Tay lo r, a Geo rg ia pr is on er pr oc eed in g pr o se , ap pe al s t h e

di sm is sa l of hi s ha be as co r p u s p e t i t io n, 28 U.S.C. § 22 54 , as se co nd or su cces si ve

an d fo r fa i lu re to pa y th e req ui si te fil in g fee or req ue st le av e to pr oc eed in fo rm a

p a u p e r i s ( “ IFP” ). W e gr an te d Tay lo r a cert ifi cat e of ap pe al ab il it y (“ COA”) on th e

fo ll owi ng is su es on ly:
(1 ) W he th er th e di st ric t c o u r t e r r e d i n co nc lu di ng th at ap pe ll an t’s 28 U.S

. C

. § 22 54 pe ti ti on , fil ed in Mar ch 20 10 , was se co nd or
su cces si ve wit hi n t he m ean in g o f 28 U.S.C. § 2 24 4( b) (2 ).
(2 ) Wh e t h e r t h e di st ric t co ur t erre d in di sm is si ng wit h p r e ju d i c e ap pe ll an t’s 28 U.S.C. § 22 54 pe ti ti on fo r fa i l u r e to pa y th e fil in g fee

or su bm it a cer ti fie d c op y of h is pr is on tru st acco un t st at em en t, ab se nt fin di ng s th at ap pe ll an t’s co nd uc t was wil lfu l or th at le ss er sa nc ti on s
wou ld be in ad eq ua te to co rrec t s uc h c on du ct

.
On ap pe al
, Tay lo r pr oc eed s pr o se an d arg ue s t h a t t h e di st ric t co ur t erre d by

de nyin g hi s req ue st th at st at e o f f ic ia ls be en

joi ne d fro m m ed ic at in g hi m , st at in g

th at va rio us m ed ic al of

fic ia ls at Vald o s t a St at e Pri so n ha ve be en m ed ic at in g hi m

in vi ol at io n of hi s rel ig io us be li efs

. He req ue st ed th at we gr an t hi m ha be as rel ie f

wit h re sp ect to hi s co nv ic ti on an d o rd er h is im m ed ia te rel eas e fro m pri so n.

Und er th e Ant it erro r i s m a n d Ef fect iv e Deat h Pen al ty Act of 19 96 , Pu b. L.

N o. 10 4- 13 2, 11 0 St at

. 12 14 (1 99 6)
, ap pe ll at e rev ie w is li m it ed to th e is s u e s

sp eci fie d in th e COA. 28 U.S.C. § 22 53 ; Mu rray v

. Uni te d St at es , 14 5 F.3 d 12 49 ,

12 5 0

- 5 1 (1 1t h Ci r. 19 98 ). Alt ho ug h we read pr o se br ie fs li be ral ly, “ is su es no t

2br ie fed on ap p e a l b y a pr o se li ti ga nt are de em ed ab an do ne d.” Tim so n v.

Sam ps on , 51 8 F .3d 87 0, 8 74 (11 th Cir . 20 08 ) (ci ta ti on s o m it te d)

.
Care fu l rev ie w of Tay lo r’s ap pe ll at e br ie f rev eal s th at he ha s no t ad dr es se d

th e is su es on whi ch th e COA was gr an te d, na m el y whe t h e r t h e d i st ric t co ur t erre d

in di sm is si ng hi s pe ti ti on as se co nd or su cces si ve an d, al te rn at iv el y , fo r fai li ng to

pa y th e co ur t fi li ng fee. His on ly ref eren ce to th e is su es rai se d in th e COA ap pe ars

to be hi s st at em en t th at hi s pe ti ti on was di sm is se d pu rs ua nt to § 22 44 (b )( 1 ) a n d
(b )(3 ). In st ead
, Tay lo r arg ue s th at th e di st ric t co ur t sh ou ld ha ve g r a n t e d hi s

req ue st fo r in

jun ct iv e rel ie f, an d req ue st s th at th is Co ur t gr an t hi m ha be as rel ie f,

ba se d on th e m er i t s o f h is cl ai m s. The refo re, Tay lo r ha s ab an do ne d th e is su e on

whi ch we gr an te d th e COA. See Atk in s v. Si ng le ta r y, 9 65 F.2 d 95 2, 95 5 n.1 (1 1t h

Ci r. 19 92 ) (co nc lu di ng th at a co un se le d § 22 54 ap pe ll an t ab an do ns is s u e s no t

ad dr es se d o n a pp eal ); s ee al so Tim so n, 51 8 F.3 d at 87 4. Mo reo ve r, be cau se we do

no t ad dr es s i s s u e s n ot in di cat ed in th e COA, we do no t co ns id er cl ai m s rel at ed to

t h e d e n ia l of in

jun ct iv e rel ie f or th e m eri ts of hi s pe ti ti on

. Mu rray, 14 5 F.3 d at

12 50 -5 1. A c co rd in gl y , we affi rm th e di st ric t co ur t’s di sm is sa l of Tay lo r’s § 22 54

pe ti ti on

.

AFFIRMED.

3