Myles v. Cain & Ieyoub
Opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
__________________
No. 96-30305 Conference Calendar __________________
ROBERT MYLES,
Petitioner-Appellant,
versus
BURL CAIN, Acting Warden RICHARD P. IEYOUB, Attorney General, State of Louisiana
Respondents-Appellees.
- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana USDC No. 95-CV-3984 E - - - - - - - - - - June 26, 1996 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, BARKSDALE, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, Robert Myles,
#87712, appeals from the district court's denial of his
postjudgment motion for copies of state trial records and
transcripts. In his appellate brief, however, Myles argues
solely the issue whether the district court erred by previously
denying his petition for a writ of habeas corpus, the denial of
* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule 47.5.4. No. 96-30305 -2-
which Myles failed to appeal. A pro se habeas petitioner
abandons issues that he does not argue. Yohey v. Collins, 985
F.2d 222, 224-25 (5th Cir. 1993). Because Myles does not address
the denial of his postjudgment motion, he has abandoned argument
on the only issue before this court. Myles’ appeal is without
arguable merit and is thus frivolous. See Howard v. King, 707
F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983). Myles is warned that the
filing of future frivolous appeals may result in the imposition
of sanctions. To avoid sanctions, Myles is further cautioned to
review any pending appeals to ensure that they do not raise
arguments that are frivolous.
APPEAL DISMISSED; SANCTIONS WARNING ISSUED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Myles v. Cain & Ieyoub (Myles v. Cain & Ieyoub) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.