# United States Court **of Appeals**  **f or the Fifth Circuit** 

**____________** No. 23

- 50623 Summary Calendar

**____________ Tyrone Stafford,** 
Plaintiff

— Appellant **,**

versus
**Arnold S. Zwicke,** Executive Sheriff, Guadalupe County Sheriff’s Office **; Magistrate Judges,** Guadalupe County **; County/District Attorney,**  Guadalupe County **; District Court of Texas Judges 274th,**  25th, 2nd 25th, Guadalupe County **; Guadalupe County Commissioners; Greg Abbott; Ken**  **Paxton; Dave Wilborn,** Guadalupe County Attorney **; Arlene Gay; Tillie Luke; Guadalupe County Court at Law #1;**  **Guadalupe County Court at Law #2; Supreme Court of Texas; Corporal F/N/U Doss,**  Guadalupe County Sheriff’s Office **; G. I. Castillo,**  Guadalupe County Sheriff’s Office **; Deputy F/N/U/ Gipson,**  Guadalupe County Sheriff’s Office **,** Defendants

— Appellees

**.**

**______________________________** Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 5:22

- CV

- 314

**____________________ __________**  United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED March 25, 2024 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 23-50623 Document: 48-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/25/2024Before **Smith, Southwick,** and **Wilson,** Circuit Judges

**. Per Curiam**  **:** ***** Tyrone Stafford filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint alleging that depu

ties of the Guadalupe County Sheriff’s Office used excessive force dur ing a traffic stop in January 2022. The district court granted summary judg ment in favor of the defendants, concluding that St afford failed to demon strate a constitutional violation

. Stafford moves to proceed in forma pauperis ( “ IFP ” ) on appeal, which consti tutes a challenge to the district court’s certi

fi cation that any appeal would not be taken in good faith because Stafford will not present a nonfrivolous appellate issue. See Baugh v. Taylor , 117 F.3d 197, 202 (5th Cir. 1997)

. Stafford ’s motion to supplement his reply brief is **GRANTED**

. Stafford devotes a majority of his initial brief to challenging the legality of his arrest. He does not meaningfully question the district court’s reasons for finding that the deputies did not use excess ive force and therefore were entitled to qualified immunity. Thus, Staf ford abandons the primary issue on appeal. See Brinkmann v. Dallas Cnty. Deputy Sheriff Abner , 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987)

. Furthermore, Staf ford abandons his § 1983 claims

a gainst the remaining defendants by not rais ing the m on appeal. See Yohey v. Collins , 985 F.2d 222, 224

– 25 (5th Cir. 1993). Accordingly, Stafford fails to raise a nonfrivolous issue with respect to the summary judgment. See Baugh , 117 F.3d at 202 n.24; **Fed. R. Civ. P** . 56(a). The appeal is without arguable merit and is thus frivolous. See Howard v. King , 707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir. 1983)

. Accordingly, the motion to pro

ceed IFP on appeal is **DENIED** , and the appeal is **DISMISSED**

. See Baugh , 117 F.3d at 202 n.24 ; **5th Cir. R** . 42.2.

**_____________________**

* This opinion is not designated for publication. See **5th Cir**

**. R** 

**.** 47.5. Case: 23-50623 Document: 48-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/25/2024