Filed: Oct. 24, 2006
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 October 23, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 05-31011 Conference Calendar CARL ANTHONY DUPERON, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus DEPUTY WARDEN VICTOR; MAJOR RILEY; SOUTH LOUISIANA CORRECTIONAL CENTER, Defendants-Appellees. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana USDC No. 6:04-CV-2304 - Before JOLLY, DeMOSS, and STEWART, Circuit Judges. P
Summary: United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT October 23, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 05-31011 Conference Calendar CARL ANTHONY DUPERON, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus DEPUTY WARDEN VICTOR; MAJOR RILEY; SOUTH LOUISIANA CORRECTIONAL CENTER, Defendants-Appellees. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana USDC No. 6:04-CV-2304 - Before JOLLY, DeMOSS, and STEWART, Circuit Judges. PE..
More
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT October 23, 2006
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 05-31011
Conference Calendar
CARL ANTHONY DUPERON,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
DEPUTY WARDEN VICTOR; MAJOR RILEY;
SOUTH LOUISIANA CORRECTIONAL CENTER,
Defendants-Appellees.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Louisiana
USDC No. 6:04-CV-2304
--------------------
Before JOLLY, DeMOSS, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Carl Anthony Duperon, Louisiana prisoner # 101335, appeals
from the district court’s order dismissing his pro se 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983 civil rights action as frivolous and for failure to state
a claim upon which relief may be granted, pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) and (ii) and 1915A.
Duperon alleged that the defendants were deliberately
indifferent to his serious medical needs when they housed him for
18 days in isolation, rather than in his prison’s medical ward,
after he fractured his jaw and had his jaw wired shut; this
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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. 05-31011
-2-
allegedly led to a serious infection. The magistrate judge
determined that Duperon’s allegations and medical records showed
that he was promptly and properly treated; that he was taken to a
hospital almost immediately after the severity of the infection
was discovered; that surgery for the fracture was performed days
later; and that Duperon’s recovery following the surgery was
uneventful. The magistrate judge concluded that, at worst,
Duperon had stated a claim of negligence or malpractice. In his
appellate brief, Duperon has failed to make specific arguments
with respect to his deliberate-indifference claims or to cite the
portions of the record upon which he relies. Accordingly, we
conclude that Duperon has effectively abandoned his claims, in
that they are inadequately briefed. See Yohey v. Collins,
985
F.2d 222, 224-25 (5th Cir. 1993); FED. R. APP. P. 28(a)(9).
The appeal is without arguable merit, is frivolous, and is
therefore dismissed. See Howard v. King,
707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th
Cir. 1983); 5TH CIR. R. 42.2. The district court’s dismissal of
Duperon’s § 1983 complaint and the dismissal of this appeal as
frivolous count as strikes under the three-strikes provision,
28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). See Adepegba v. Hammons,
103 F.3d 383,
387-88 (5th Cir. 1996). Duperon is cautioned that if he
accumulates a third strike under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), he will not
be permitted to proceed in forma pauperis 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).
APPEAL DISMISSED; SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.