Filed: Aug. 08, 1995
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 95-50303 Summary Calendar _ JOHNNY ROBINSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus DOUGLAS BANNISTER, Defendant-Appellee. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. W-93-CV-117 - - - - - - - - - - July 17, 1995 Before JOLLY, DAVIS and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Johnny Robinson has applied for leave to appeal in forma pauperis (IFP) the district court's order
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 95-50303 Summary Calendar _ JOHNNY ROBINSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus DOUGLAS BANNISTER, Defendant-Appellee. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. W-93-CV-117 - - - - - - - - - - July 17, 1995 Before JOLLY, DAVIS and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Johnny Robinson has applied for leave to appeal in forma pauperis (IFP) the district court's order ..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
__________________
No. 95-50303
Summary Calendar
__________________
JOHNNY ROBINSON,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
DOUGLAS BANNISTER,
Defendant-Appellee.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. W-93-CV-117
- - - - - - - - - -
July 17, 1995
Before JOLLY, DAVIS and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Johnny Robinson has applied for leave to appeal in forma
pauperis (IFP) the district court's order dismissing his action
for failure to provide sufficient information to effect service
on defendant Douglas Bannister, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m).
To be granted leave to appeal IFP, Robinson must demonstrate that
*
Local Rule 47.5 provides: "The publication of opinions
that have no precedential value and merely decide particular
cases on the basis of well-settled principles of law imposes
needless expense on the public and burdens on the legal
profession." Pursuant to that Rule, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published.
No. 95-50303
-2-
he will present a nonfrivolous issue on appeal. Carson v.
Polley,
689 F.2d 562, 586 (5th Cir. 1982).
Robinson argues that he has raised claims cognizable for
relief under ยง 1983 when he alleged that defendant Bannister used
excessive force against him. Robinson does not challenge whether
the district court properly dismissed his action pursuant to Rule
4(m) for failure to provide sufficient information to have
Bannister served within 120 days, which is the only proper issue
on appeal. Consequently, he does not address the correct issue
on appeal. Therefore, this court need not consider it. See
Brinkmann v. Abner,
813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987).
Because Robinson has failed to identify a non-frivolous
issue, the motion for leave to proceed IFP on appeal is DENIED
and the appeal is DISMISSED. Howard v. King,
707 F.2d 215, 219-
20 (5th Cir. 1983); 5th Cir. R.42.2.