Brown v. Norris

Eighth Circuit

Brown v. Norris

175 F. App'x 780

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

DecidedApril 12, 2006

DocketNo. 04-1327

StatusPublished

This text of 175 F. App'x 780 (Brown v. Norris) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Brown v. Norris, 175 F. App'x 780 (8th Cir. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Arkansas inmate Donald X. Brown appeals the district court’s preservice dismissal without prejudice of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action as barred by the “three-strikes” provision of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). We grant Brown leave to proceed in forma [781]*781pauperis, and we remand to the district court.

We review de novo a district court’s determination of qualifying strikes. See Rivera v. Allin, 144 F.3d 719, 723 (11th Cir.1998). After reviewing the relevant documents from the cases the district court counted as strikes, we conclude that the two dismissals for failure to exhaust prison grievance procedures—Brown v. Jorgenson, No. 5:98CV00245, and Brown v. Mobley, No. 4:01CV00302—do not count as strikes. While we express no opinion as to whether Brown’s other dismissals count as strikes under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), the record before us establishes Brown can have no more than two strikes.

Accordingly, we remand to the district court for further proceedings. We deny Brown’s motion for appellate counsel.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Arkansas inmate Donald X. Brown appeals the district court’s preservice dismissal without prejudice of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action as barred by the “three-strikes” provision of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). We grant Brown leave to proceed in forma [781]*781pauperis, and we remand to the district court.

We review de novo a district court’s determination of qualifying strikes. See Rivera v. Allin, 144 F.3d 719, 723 (11th Cir.1998). After reviewing the relevant documents from the cases the district court counted as strikes, we conclude that the two dismissals for failure to exhaust prison grievance procedures—Brown v. Jorgenson, No. 5:98CV00245, and Brown v. Mobley, No. 4:01CV00302—do not count as strikes. While we express no opinion as to whether Brown’s other dismissals count as strikes under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), the record before us establishes Brown can have no more than two strikes.

Accordingly, we remand to the district court for further proceedings. We deny Brown’s motion for appellate counsel.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

175 F. App'x 780, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brown-v-norris-ca8-2006.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack