Court Opinion

ID: 9390619
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-04-28 00:02:25.572113+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:18:35.763585
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-40751        Document: 00516729554             Page: 1      Date Filed: 04/27/2023

             United States Court of Appeals
                  for the Fifth Circuit
                                     ____________                                United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                          Fifth Circuit

                                      No. 22-40751
                                                                                        FILED
                                                                                     April 27, 2023
                                    Summary Calendar
                                    ____________                                     Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                          Clerk
   Michael Guisto Cromey, Jr.,

                                                                    Plaintiff—Appellant,

                                            versus

   Matt Bingham, District Attorney, Smith County (Retired); Jacob
   Putman, District Attorney, Smith County; Jeremy Thompson, Tyler
   Police Department; April Molina, Tyler Police Department; Michael
   Guisto Leone, also known as Michael Guisto Cromey, Sr.,

                                              Defendants—Appellees.
                     ______________________________

                     Appeal from the United States District Court
                          for the Eastern District of Texas
                               USDC No. 6:22-CV-210
                     ______________________________

   Before Duncan, Oldham, and Wilson, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam:*
         Michael Guisto Cromey, Jr., Texas prisoner # 02126938, moves to
   proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) on appeal following the district court’s
   dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 suit pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1).

         _____________________
         *
             This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 22-40751      Document: 00516729554          Page: 2   Date Filed: 04/27/2023

                                    No. 22-40751

   Cromey’s IFP motion challenges the district court’s determination that the
   appeal is not taken in good faith. See Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 202 (5th
   Cir. 1997). Our inquiry into whether the appeal is taken in good faith “is
   limited to whether the appeal involves ‘legal points arguable on their merits
   (and therefore not frivolous).’” Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir.
   1983) (citation omitted).
          The district court dismissed the suit as barred by Heck v. Humphrey,
   512 U.S. 477 (1994), because Cromey’s claims necessarily implied the
   invalidity of his conviction for the aggravated assault of his father with a
   deadly weapon, and Cromey had failed to demonstrate that the conviction
   had been reversed, expunged, declared invalid, or called into question. See
   id. at 486-87. Cromey does not meaningfully challenge the district court’s
   reasoning but, instead, continues to insist that he is innocent. See Brinkmann
   v. Dallas Cnty. Deputy Sheriff Abner, 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987)
   (holding that appellant’s failure to identify error in district court’s legal
   analysis is the same as if he had not appealed). Accordingly, he fails to show
   that his appeal involves a nonfrivolous issue, his motion to proceed IFP is
   DENIED, and his appeal is DISMISSED as frivolous. See Baugh, 117 F.3d
   at 202 n.24; 5th Cir. R. 42.2.
          The district court’s dismissal of the suit under § 1915A(b)(1) and our
   dismissal of this appeal as frivolous each count as strikes under 28 U.S.C.
   § 1915(g). See Adepegba v. Hammons, 103 F.3d 383, 388 (5th Cir. 1996),
   abrogated in part on other grounds by Coleman v. Tollefson, 575 U.S. 532, 537
   (2015). Cromey is WARNED that if he accumulates three strikes, he will
   not be permitted to proceed IFP 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. See § 1915(g).

                                             2