Filed: Feb. 13, 2007
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 February 13, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 05-41802 Conference Calendar TROY A. SMOCKS, Petitioner-Appellant, versus UNITED STATES MARSHAL, Respondent-Appellee. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 4:05-CV-422 - Before BARKSDALE, GARZA, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Troy A. Smocks, a federal prisoner, moves th
Summary: United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT February 13, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 05-41802 Conference Calendar TROY A. SMOCKS, Petitioner-Appellant, versus UNITED STATES MARSHAL, Respondent-Appellee. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 4:05-CV-422 - Before BARKSDALE, GARZA, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Troy A. Smocks, a federal prisoner, moves thi..
More
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT February 13, 2007
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 05-41802
Conference Calendar
TROY A. SMOCKS,
Petitioner-Appellant,
versus
UNITED STATES MARSHAL,
Respondent-Appellee.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:05-CV-422
--------------------
Before BARKSDALE, GARZA, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Troy A. Smocks, a federal prisoner, moves this court for
authorization to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) in his appeal
from the district court’s dismissal of his petition for habeas
relief, filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Smocks argues that he was
denied the right to a speedy trial.
Smocks has failed to establish a nonfrivolous ground for
appeal because he waived his claim that he was denied a speedy
trial. See United States v. Bradfield,
113 F.3d 515, 526 (5th
Cir. 1997); United States v. Bell,
966 F.2d 914, 915 (5th Cir.
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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. 05-41802
-2-
1992); Carson v. Polley,
689 F.2d 562, 586 (5th Cir. 1982);
28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3). The motion to proceed IFP is denied.
As the appeal contains no nonfrivolous issues, it is dismissed.
Howard v. King,
707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir. 1983); 5TH CIR.
R. 42.2. Smocks’s motion for appointment of counsel is likewise
denied.
MOTIONS DENIED; APPEAL DISMISSED.