Filed: Apr. 12, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 00-11291 Conference Calendar WOODROW WHITE, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus CLAXTON METAL; ELIZABETH BEACH; DALLAS COUNTY, Defendants-Appellees. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:00-CV-1972-D - April 11, 2001 Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and JONES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Woodrow White, Texas prisoner # 00061790, filed the instant civil rights lawsuit against a trial witness
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 00-11291 Conference Calendar WOODROW WHITE, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus CLAXTON METAL; ELIZABETH BEACH; DALLAS COUNTY, Defendants-Appellees. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:00-CV-1972-D - April 11, 2001 Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and JONES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Woodrow White, Texas prisoner # 00061790, filed the instant civil rights lawsuit against a trial witness,..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-11291
Conference Calendar
WOODROW WHITE,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
CLAXTON METAL; ELIZABETH BEACH; DALLAS COUNTY,
Defendants-Appellees.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 3:00-CV-1972-D
--------------------
April 11, 2001
Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and JONES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Woodrow White, Texas prisoner # 00061790, filed the instant
civil rights lawsuit against a trial witness, his trial counsel,
and the judge presiding over his state-court trial for theft,
asserting that they had violated his constitutional rights. The
district court dismissed the lawsuit as frivolous, pursuant to 28
U.S.C. ยง 1915. On appeal, White argues for the first time that
the evidence was factually and legally insufficient to support
his conviction. Because this claim was not presented to the
district court, this court will not address it. See Shanks v.
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 00-11291
-2-
AlliedSignal, Inc.,
169 F.3d 988, 993 n.6 (5th Cir. 1999); Burch
v. Coca-Cola,
119 F.3d 305, 319 (5th Cir. 1997).
White briefs no argument that the district court erred in
dismissing his civil rights lawsuit, and he has thus abandoned
the sole ground for appeal. See Yohey v. Collins,
985 F.2d 222,
224-25 (5th Cir. 1993). The appeal is therefore frivolous, and,
as such, it is DISMISSED. See Howard v. King,
707 F.2d 215, 219-
20 (5th Cir. 1983); 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.
APPEAL DISMISSED.