Case Name: Earnest L. SMITH, Petitioner-Appellant, v. State of LOUISIANA, Department of Public Safety and Corrections, Board of Parole; Verdegra Scott; E. Peggy Landry; Getihen McCastle; Marlon Every, Parole Officer, RespondentsAppellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2003-08-11
Citations: 80 F. App'x 297
Docket Number: No. 02-31180
Parties: Earnest L. SMITH, Petitioner-Appellant, v. State of LOUISIANA, Department of Public Safety and Corrections, Board of Parole; Verdegra Scott; E. Peggy Landry; Getihen McCastle; Marlon Every, Parole Officer, RespondentsAppellees.
Judges: Before JONES, BENAVIDES, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 80
Pages: 297–298

Head Matter:
Earnest L. SMITH, Petitioner-Appellant, v. State of LOUISIANA, Department of Public Safety and Corrections, Board of Parole; Verdegra Scott; E. Peggy Landry; Getihen McCastle; Marlon Every, Parole Officer, RespondentsAppellees.
No. 02-31180
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Aug. 11, 2003.
Before JONES, BENAVIDES, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Earnest L. Smith, Louisiana prisoner # 1077412, appeals from the district court's denial of his motion to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition. Smith presents no argument that the district court erred in denying his IFP motion and, consequently, has waived any challenge to the district court's IFP ruling. See Hughes v. Johnson, 191 F.3d 607, 612-13 (5th Cir.1999). Smith's failure to brief the denial of IFP status is the same as if he had not appealed the judgment. Brinkmann v. Dallas County Deputy Sheriff Abner, 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir.1987). Accordingly, the appeal is without arguable merit and is hereby DISMISSED as frivolous. See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir.1983).
Smith's request for a certificate of appealability is DENIED as unnecessary. To the extent he seeks IFP status in this court, this court may authorize Smith to proceed IFP on appeal only if he is economically eligible and his appeal is not frivolous. Jackson v. Dallas Police Dep't, 811 F.2d 260, 261 (5th Cir.1986). Because the appeal is frivolous, IFP is DENIED.
COA DENIED AS UNNECESSARY; IFP DENIED; APPEAL DISMISSED AS FRIVOLOUS.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.