Kearley v. Parrish

Fifth Circuit

Kearley v. Parrish

84 F. App'x 445

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedJanuary 5, 2004

Docket03-60628

StatusUnpublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 84 F. App'x 445 (Kearley v. Parrish) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Kearley v. Parrish, 84 F. App'x 445 (5th Cir. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM. *

Victor B. Kearley, Mississippi prisoner # 16946, appeals the district court’s dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint as frivolous. Kearley’s claim that counsel’s actions in defending him were done under color of state law, thereby making counsel liable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for ineffective assistance, is without merit. Polk County v. Dodson, 454 U.S. 312, 102 S.Ct. 445, 70 L.Ed.2d 509 (1981). Nor has Kearley stated a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 conspiracy claim upon which relief could be granted, as he has failed to plead the operative facts upon which his claim is based. See Lynch v. Cannatella, 810 F.2d 1363, 1369-70 (5th Cir.1987); see also Kane Enters, v. MacGregor (USA) Inc., 322 F.3d 371, 374 (5th Cir.2003).

*446 Because Kearley did not allege in the district court that the state public defender system was unconstitutional, this court need not consider this claim. See Leverette v. Louisville Ladder Co., 183 F.3d 339, 342 (5th Cir.1999). Kearley’s argument that the district judge lacked jurisdiction due to an administrative order of reassignment to another judge is without merit.

Kearley’s appeal is without merit and is therefore DISMISSED as frivolous. See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir.1983); 5th Cir. R. 42.2 The dismissal of this appeal as frivolous and the dismissal of the complaint by the district court as frivolous both count as a strike for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). See Adepegba v. Hammons, 103 F.3d 383, 388 (5th Cir.1996). Kearley is therefore CAUTIONED that once he accumulates three strikes, he will not be permitted to proceed in forma pauperis in any civil action or appeal filed while he is incarcerated or detained in any facility unless he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).

All outstanding motion are DENIED.

APPEAL DISMISSED; THREE-STRIKES WARNING ISSUED; MOTIONS DENIED.

*

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.

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

PER CURIAM. *

Victor B. Kearley, Mississippi prisoner # 16946, appeals the district court’s dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint as frivolous. Kearley’s claim that counsel’s actions in defending him were done under color of state law, thereby making counsel liable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for ineffective assistance, is without merit. Polk County v. Dodson, 454 U.S. 312, 102 S.Ct. 445, 70 L.Ed.2d 509 (1981). Nor has Kearley stated a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 conspiracy claim upon which relief could be granted, as he has failed to plead the operative facts upon which his claim is based. See Lynch v. Cannatella, 810 F.2d 1363, 1369-70 (5th Cir.1987); see also Kane Enters, v. MacGregor (USA) Inc., 322 F.3d 371, 374 (5th Cir.2003).

*446 Because Kearley did not allege in the district court that the state public defender system was unconstitutional, this court need not consider this claim. See Leverette v. Louisville Ladder Co., 183 F.3d 339, 342 (5th Cir.1999). Kearley’s argument that the district judge lacked jurisdiction due to an administrative order of reassignment to another judge is without merit.

Kearley’s appeal is without merit and is therefore DISMISSED as frivolous. See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir.1983); 5th Cir. R. 42.2 The dismissal of this appeal as frivolous and the dismissal of the complaint by the district court as frivolous both count as a strike for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). See Adepegba v. Hammons, 103 F.3d 383, 388 (5th Cir.1996). Kearley is therefore CAUTIONED that once he accumulates three strikes, he will not be permitted to proceed in forma pauperis in any civil action or appeal filed while he is incarcerated or detained in any facility unless he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).

All outstanding motion are DENIED.

APPEAL DISMISSED; THREE-STRIKES WARNING ISSUED; MOTIONS DENIED.

*

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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

84 F. App'x 445, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kearley-v-parrish-ca5-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack