Court Opinion

ID: 9893554
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-10-27 18:00:37.844577+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:04:28.696809
License: Public Domain

Case: 23-60364       Document: 00516947061             Page: 1      Date Filed: 10/27/2023

              United States Court of Appeals
                   for the Fifth Circuit                                      United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                       Fifth Circuit
                                    ____________
                                                                                     FILED
                                     No. 23-60364                             October 27, 2023
                                   Summary Calendar                             Lyle W. Cayce
                                   ____________                                      Clerk

   United States of America,

                                                                    Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                           versus

   Jesse M. Skinner,

                                             Defendant—Appellant.
                    ______________________________

                    Appeal from the United States District Court
                      for the Southern District of Mississippi
                              USDC No. 1:02-CR-93-1
                    ______________________________

   Before Jones, Higginson, and Ho, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
          Jesse M. Skinner, federal prisoner # 35713-019, moves for leave to
   proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) in his appeal from the district court’s order
   denying his pro se postconviction motion to dismiss certain counts in the
   indictment for his 2004 convictions of various controlled substance,

          _____________________
          *
              Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 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   should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set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 Circuit Rule 47.5.4.
Case: 23-60364      Document: 00516947061            Page: 2    Date Filed: 10/27/2023

                                      No. 23-60364

   firearms, and assault offenses. This motion is a challenge to the district
   court’s certification that the appeal is not taken in good faith. See Baugh v.
   Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 202 (5th Cir. 1997).
          Although Skinner did not specify the legal authority under which he
   sought dismissal of his counts of conviction, the district court seemingly
   construed his motion as seeking relief under Federal Rule of Criminal
   Procedure 12. Skinner’s postjudgment motion should have been construed
   as seeking relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, which “is the proper vehicle for
   challenging the validity of a conviction and sentence” in the collateral
   context. Hooker v. Sivley, 187 F.3d 680, 681 (5th Cir. 1999). However,
   because Skinner had not received this court’s authorization to file a
   successive § 2255 motion, the district court would not have had jurisdiction
   to consider that motion. See id. at 682. Because there was no other statutory
   authority permitting Skinner’s motion, it was, in essence, “a meaningless,
   unauthorized motion” which the district court was without jurisdiction to
   entertain. United States v. Early, 27 F.3d 140, 142 (5th Cir. 1994).
          As Skinner has not shown that the appeal raises a nonfrivolous issue,
   his appeal lacks arguable merit. See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th
   Cir. 1983). Accordingly, Skinner’s motion for IFP is DENIED, and the
   appeal is DISMISSED as frivolous. See Baugh, 117 F.3d at 202 & n.24; 5th
   Cir. R. 42.2. In light of Skinner’s litigation history, he is WARNED that
   future frivolous, repetitive, or otherwise abusive filings will result in the
   imposition of sanctions, including dismissal, monetary sanctions, and
   restrictions on his ability to file pleadings in this court or any court subject to
   this court’s jurisdiction. He should review any pending appeals and actions
   and move to dismiss any that are frivolous, repetitive, or otherwise abusive.

                                           2