Case Name: Charles Franklin IRELAND, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Doug DRETKE; Sandra Baldwin, Correctional Officer; John Doe, Correctional Officer, Beto 1; Jane Doe, Correctional Officer, Beto 1; Unidentified Unidentified, Officer of Gang Intelligence, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-03-14
Citations: 222 F. App'x 422
Docket Number: No. 06-40387
Parties: Charles Franklin IRELAND, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Doug DRETKE; Sandra Baldwin, Correctional Officer; John Doe, Correctional Officer, Beto 1; Jane Doe, Correctional Officer, Beto 1; Unidentified Unidentified, Officer of Gang Intelligence, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before JOLLY, DENNIS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 222
Pages: 422–422

Head Matter:
Charles Franklin IRELAND, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Doug DRETKE; Sandra Baldwin, Correctional Officer; John Doe, Correctional Officer, Beto 1; Jane Doe, Correctional Officer, Beto 1; Unidentified Unidentified, Officer of Gang Intelligence, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 06-40387
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
March 14, 2007.
Charles Franklin Ireland, Palestine, TX, pro se.
Patrick Nicholas Brezik, Office of the Attorney General Law Enforcement Defense Div., Austin, TX, for Defendant-Appellee.
Before JOLLY, DENNIS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Charles Franklin Ireland, Texas prisoner # 506419, appeals the dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 suit for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. Ireland filed an untimely Step 1 grievance and did not attempt to file a Step 2 grievance. Ireland's untimely Step 1 grievance does not excuse his failure to exhaust the prison grievance system. See Days v. Johnson, 322 F.3d 863, 866-67 (5th Cir.2003).
Ireland argues that he sufficiently exhausted his administrative remedies because he filed his Step 1 grievance while in the prison infirmary, which did not have a grievance box, by giving it to a nurse. Because Ireland did not raise this argument in the district court, we do not consider it. See Leverette v. Louisville Ladder Co., 183 F.3d 339, 342 (5th Cir.1999); see also Stewart Glass & Mirror, Inc. v. U.S. Auto Glass Discount Ctrs., Inc., 200 F.3d 307, 316-17 (5th Cir.2000). We also do not consider Ireland's argument, raised for the first time in his reply brief, that the district court erroneously denied his request for the appointment of counsel. See Wallace v. County of Comal, 400 F.3d 284, 292 (5th Cir.2005).
The district court's judgment is AFFIRMED.
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.