Case Name: Verlie Lee HENDERSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Doug DRETKE, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division; Rissie Owens, Chairwoman, Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles; Dan Jones, Special Review Unit, Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-10-24
Citations: 202 F. App'x 792
Docket Number: No. 06-40044
Parties: Verlie Lee HENDERSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Doug DRETKE, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division; Rissie Owens, Chairwoman, Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles; Dan Jones, Special Review Unit, Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before JOLLY, DeMOSS, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 202
Pages: 792–793

Head Matter:
Verlie Lee HENDERSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Doug DRETKE, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division; Rissie Owens, Chairwoman, Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles; Dan Jones, Special Review Unit, Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 06-40044
Conference Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Oct. 24, 2006.
Verlie Lee Henderson, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division, Beto Unit, Tennessee Colony, TX, pro se.
Before JOLLY, DeMOSS, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Verlie Lee Henderson, Texas prisoner # 199786, appeals the dismissal of his civil rights complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. In that complaint, Henderson challenged the constitutionality of Texas' parole procedures. Henderson's brief, however, does not address the district court's determinations that (1) Fifth Circuit precedent deemed his ex post facto claim frivolous and (2) his due process challenge was not cognizable in a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 proceeding. These issues are therefore waived. See Brinkmann v. Dallas County Deputy Sheriff Abner, 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir.1987).
Henderson's appeal is frivolous and is therefore dismissed. See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir.1983); 5th Cir. R. 42.2. We remind Henderson that, after the docketing of the instant appeal, we imposed the 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) bar in Henderson v. Enns, 179 Fed.Appx. 225 (5th Cir.2006) (unpublished). Consequently, Henderson is barred from proceeding in forma pauperis 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. § 1915(g).
APPEAL DISMISSED.
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.