Mendoza v. Trump

708 F. App'x 958

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
• Decided: January 16, 2018
• Docket: 17-1386
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

ORDER DENYING LEAVE TO APPEAL WITHOUT PREPAYMENT OF FEES *

Mary Beck Briscoe Circuit Judge

Plaintiff Stella Dawn Mendoza, appearing pro se, has filed a motion with this court seeking leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. We deny Mendoza’s motion and dismiss the appeal.

I

On October 3, 2017, Mendoza filed a pro se complaint listing herself, Manuel Angel Rivera, “G.S.M.” and “A.R.M.” as plaintiffs. ROA, Vol. 1 at 14. The complaint listed as defendants Donald Trump and various members of his family, an assortment of federal and state entities, agencies and employees, and various private entities and individuals. In a section of the complaint form that asked her to briefly state the background of her case, Mendoza responded as follows:

As of September 14, 2016,1 have non-protection against corruption of blood, Dissection, Law of Nations, Laceny [sic].

All US Courts have violated subornation of perjury, counterfeiting.

All US Gov Employee [sic] have committed Act or behavior that gravely violates the sentiment or accepted Standard of the community.

Crimes Against Persons to Stella Dawn Mendoza; Crimes Against Property.

Intergrity [sic] of the judicial process.

Crimes Against Plaintiffs: A.R.M, & C.S.M. Manuel Angel Rivera & 108933#

Id. at 24-25. The complaint proceeded to list three separate claims for relief, but each is nonsensical. Finally, in a section of the complaint entitled “REQUEST FOR RELIEF," Mendoza stated:

Asking/Requesting: The property of 875 Mariposa Street, Denver Colorado 80204 w/ Attached of the title property deed all transfed [sic] to Stella Dawn Mendoza As of September 29,2017

I Am Requesting to/and for the Impeachment as well ASAP to detaining As The 45th president of the United State [sic] of America Federal Government Employee. As well A.S.A.P to detaining the Administration of Donald Trump. I Am Also requesting of A [sic] Office Reinstatement employees Barack Hussein Obama and Joseph Biden

A.S.A.P, of the impeachment and Arrest John Trump Administrations

* All 15 US Department [sic] Closed Detained

* And Request of Sibling/Son Manuel Angel Rivera to be Released from the crime and Sentencing of December 22 2010 Sentencing in Mesa County, Colorado with a crime of no evidence/no determination D.O.C. 108933.

Id. at 28.

On October 6, 2017, the district court issued an order directing the clerk of the district court to dismiss the action. The district court noted at the outset of its order that in an earlier civil case, Mendoza had been sanctioned and “enjoined from filing pro se lawsuits in this Court without first obtaining leave of court to proceed pro se,” Id. at 57. The district court in turn noted that “Mendoza ha[d] not submitted all of the required documents” to obtain permission to proceed pro se and “ha[d] not provided all of the information specified in the sanction order.” Id. at 58. The district court also noted that Mendoza had asserted claims in the complaint on behalf of other individuals (specifically Manuel Angel Rivera and “C.S.M.” and “A.R.M.”), yet was “the only purported plaintiff to have signed the Complaint.” Id. Ultimately, the district court ordered that the complaint and action be “dismissed without prejudice for failure to comply with the sanction order restricting ... Mendoza’s ability to file pro se actions in this Court.” Id. at 59. The district court also “certifie[d] pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from [its] Order [wa]s not taken in good faith” and it therefore denied Mendoza leave to proceed in forma pau-peris on appeal. Id.

Final judgment in the case was entered on October 6, 2017. Mendoza filed a notice of appeal on October 27, 2017. She has since filed with this court a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal.

II

Where, as here, an appellant seeks leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal, we have authority to deny that request and dismiss the appeal without reaching the merits. See Hunt v. Downing, 112 F.3d 452, 453 (10th Cir. 1997). Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i), the “court shall dismiss the case at any time if the court determines that ... the action or appeal ... is frivolous.” We have long held that “[a]n appeal is frivolous when the result is obvious, or the appellant’s arguments of error are wholly without merit.” Olson v. Coleman, 997 F.2d 726, 728 (10th Cir. 1993) (quotation marks omitted).

Having reviewed the record on appeal, including Mendoza’s complaint, as well as her appellate brief, we conclude that her appeal is indeed frivolous. Both the complaint and Mendoza’s appellate brief, even liberally construed, are simply nonsensical and fail to allege valid claims for relief against any of the named defendants.

Mendoza’s motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal is DENIED and the appeal is DISMISSED.

* This order is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel.