Filed: Apr. 22, 2003
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT April 22, 2003 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 02-41420 Conference Calendar JAY BRENT VINEYARD, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus CAROLYN FIELDS, Defendant-Appellee. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. G-02-CV-529 - Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE, and STEWART, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Jay Brent Vineyard, Texas inmate # 1027912, appeals
Summary: United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT April 22, 2003 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 02-41420 Conference Calendar JAY BRENT VINEYARD, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus CAROLYN FIELDS, Defendant-Appellee. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. G-02-CV-529 - Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE, and STEWART, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Jay Brent Vineyard, Texas inmate # 1027912, appeals ..
More
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT April 22, 2003
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 02-41420
Conference Calendar
JAY BRENT VINEYARD,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
CAROLYN FIELDS,
Defendant-Appellee.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. G-02-CV-529
--------------------
Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Jay Brent Vineyard, Texas inmate # 1027912, appeals the
dismissal of his civil rights complaint for failure to comply
with the district court’s order that he pay an initial partial
filing fee of $2.60. Vineyard offers no reason on appeal for why
he refused to comply with the court’s order to pay the filing
fee. The district court did not abuse its discretion in
dismissing his complaint under FED. R. CIV. P. 41(b). McCullough
v. Lynaugh,
835 F.2d 1126, 1127 (5th Cir. 1988).
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 02-41420
-2-
Vineyard’s appeal is without arguable merit and is
therefore frivolous. See Howard v. King,
707 F.2d 215, 220
(5th Cir. 1983). Accordingly, his appeal is DISMISSED. See
5TH CIR. R. 42.2.
Vineyard is cautioned that the dismissal of this appeal as
frivolous counts as a strike for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).
See Adepegba v. Hammons,
103 F.3d 383, 385-87 (5th Cir. 1996).
Vineyard is also cautioned that if he accumulates three "strikes"
under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), he will not be able to proceed in
forma pauperis (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 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(g).