Court Opinion

ID: 9838545
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-06 19:02:12.409556+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:45:32.956624
License: Public Domain

USCA11 Case: 22-11946    Document: 27-1    Date Filed: 09/06/2023   Page: 1 of 3

                                                 [DO NOT PUBLISH]
                                  In the
                United States Court of Appeals
                         For the Eleventh Circuit

                          ____________________

                               No. 22-11946
                          Non-Argument Calendar
                          ____________________

       DERRICK ALLEN,
                                                    Plaintiﬀ-Appellant,
       versus
       J SANTIAGO,
       Awp,
       C MAIORANA,
       Warden, et al.,
                                                 Defendants-Appellees.

                          ____________________
USCA11 Case: 22-11946      Document: 27-1     Date Filed: 09/06/2023     Page: 2 of 3

       2                      Opinion of the Court                 22-11946

                  Appeal from the United States District Court
                      for the Northern District of Florida
                   D.C. Docket No. 3:22-cv-03145-TKW-EMT
                           ____________________

       Before NEWSOM, GRANT, and LAGOA, Circuit Judges.
       PER CURIAM:
                Derrick Allen, pro se, appeals the district court’s dismissal
       without prejudice of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action as malicious under
       28 U.S.C. § 1915A. He argues that the form complaint that he filled
       out was ambiguous, and that he did not intentionally misrepresent
       his litigation history or otherwise act in bad faith.
               We review for abuse of discretion a sua sponte dismissal un-
       der § 1915A(b)(1), which requires district courts to dismiss mali-
       cious filings. Daker v. Ward, 999 F.3d 1300, 1307 (11th Cir. 2021).
       An action is malicious when a prisoner misrepresents his prior liti-
       gation history on a complaint form requiring disclosure of such his-
       tory and signs the complaint under penalty of perjury. See Rivera v.
       Allin, 144 F.3d 719, 731 (11th Cir. 1998) (counting as a strike under
       § 1915(g) an action that was dismissed for an abuse of the legal pro-
       cess because the inmate lied under penalty of perjury about a prior
       lawsuit), overruled on other grounds by Jones v. Bock, 549 U.S. 199
       (2007).
              The district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing
       Allen’s complaint without prejudice because he failed to disclose
       all of his relevant prior litigation, and the court was within its
USCA11 Case: 22-11946       Document: 27-1        Date Filed: 09/06/2023       Page: 3 of 3

       22-11946                 Opinion of the Court                             3

       discretion to dismiss as malicious because of that failure. Accord-
       ingly, we affirm the district court’s dismissal of the action without
       prejudice.
              AFFIRMED. 1

       1 Additionally, Allen’s motion for appointment of counsel is DENIED, and his
       motion to consolidate the appeal with Case Number 22-13808 is DENIED as
       MOOT.