Filed: Jun. 18, 1998
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 97-41509 Conference Calendar GERALD GLEN SHED, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus DOYLE MCLVANEY ET AL., Defendants-Appellees. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. G-96-CV-523 - - - - - - - - - - June 16, 1998 Before DAVIS, PARKER, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Gerald Glen Shed, Texas prisoner # 658933, appeals the district court’s 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) dis
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 97-41509 Conference Calendar GERALD GLEN SHED, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus DOYLE MCLVANEY ET AL., Defendants-Appellees. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. G-96-CV-523 - - - - - - - - - - June 16, 1998 Before DAVIS, PARKER, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Gerald Glen Shed, Texas prisoner # 658933, appeals the district court’s 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) dism..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-41509
Conference Calendar
GERALD GLEN SHED,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
DOYLE MCLVANEY ET AL.,
Defendants-Appellees.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. G-96-CV-523
- - - - - - - - - -
June 16, 1998
Before DAVIS, PARKER, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Gerald Glen Shed, Texas prisoner # 658933, appeals the
district court’s 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) dismissal as frivolous of
his pro se, in forma pauperis civil rights lawsuit, pursuant to
42 U.S.C. § 1983. Shed’s sole argument on appeal is that being
forced to work even though he was never sentenced to hard labor
subjects him to involuntary servitude in violation of the
Thirteenth Amendment.
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
No. 97-41509
-2-
Shed acknowledges in his complaint that he may choose not to
work but will lose good-time and work-time credits if he so
chooses. Because he has a choice in refusing to work, albeit a
“painful” one, Shed’s Thirteenth-Amendment claim is meritless.
See Watson v. Graves,
909 F.2d 1549, 1552 (5th Cir. 1990). His
appeal is therefore dismissed as frivolous. See Howard v. King,
707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983); 5th Cir. R. 42.2.
Shed is cautioned that any future frivolous appeals or
pleadings filed by him or on his behalf will invite the
imposition of sanctions. He should therefore review any pending
appeals to ensure that they do not raise arguments that are
frivolous.
APPEAL DISMISSED; SANCTIONS WARNING ISSUED.