Court Opinion

ID: 9364944
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-01-20 19:00:28.321796+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:15:41.491095
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-30300         Document: 00516618162            Page: 1      Date Filed: 01/20/2023

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

                                                                                FILED
                                                                         January 20, 2023
                                        No. 22-30300                       Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                Clerk

   Jeremy Lynn Orr,

                                                                  Petitioner—Appellant,

                                             versus

   United States of America; Federal Bureau of Prisons;
   Warden Ma'at,

                                                                Respondents—Appellees.

                      Appeal from the United States District Court
                         for the Western District of Louisiana
                                USDC No. 2:22-CV-184

   Before Wiener, Elrod, and Engelhardt, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam:*
          Petitioner-Appellant Jeremy Lynn Orr, federal prisoner # 33617-045,
   seeks leave to appeal in forma pauperis from the dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. §
   2241 petition. Because Orr has not identified any error in the district court’s
   reasoning or shown that his appeal involves “legal points arguable on their

          *
              This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 22-30300     Document: 00516618162           Page: 2   Date Filed: 01/20/2023

                                    No. 22-30300

   merits (and therefore not frivolous),” his petition is DENIED. See Howard
   v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir. 1983) (citation omitted).
          Because Orr has not raised a viable § 2241 claim, there was no error in
   the district court’s denial of his motion for appointed counsel. See 18 U.S.C.
   § 3006A(a)(2)(B).     His motion for appellate counsel is therefore also
   DENIED.
          This frivolous appeal is DISMISSED. See 5th Cir. R. 42.2.

                                         2