Currington v. Bynum (INMATE 3)

• Court: District Court, M.D. Alabama
• Decided: January 22, 2025
• Docket: 1:23-cv-00120
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, SOUTHERN DIVISION

DEANDRE D. CURRINGTON, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) CIVIL ACTION NO. v. ) 1:23cv120-MHT ) (WO) MASON BYNUM, Deputy Chief, ) ) Defendant. )

ORDER This case is before the court on plaintiff’s motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and his motion for appointment of counsel. Because plaintiff’s appeal has already been dismissed, and this case is closed, the court finds that his motions are moot.*

* The court notes that, as grounds for his motion for leave to appeal in forma pauperis, plaintiff argues that he is indigent. However, plaintiff should be aware that, even when a plaintiff is indigent, “[a]n appeal may not be taken in forma pauperis if the trial court certifies in writing that it is not taken in good faith.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). In making the determination as to good faith, a court must use an objective standard, such as whether the appeal is “frivolous,” Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 445 (1962), or “has no substantive merit.” United States v. Bottoson, 644 F.2d 1174, 1176 (5th Cir. Unit Accordingly, it is ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 24) and

motion for appointment of counsel (Doc. 26) are denied as moot. This case remains closed. DONE, this the 22nd day of January, 2025.

/s/ Myron H. Thompson UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

B May 15, 1981) (per curiam); see also Rudolph v. Allen, 666 F.2d 519, 520 (11th Cir. 1982) (per curiam); Morris v. Ross, 663 F.2d 1032 (11th Cir. 1981). The court need not make a determination of good faith here, because the appeal has already been dismissed. 2