Patrick Sanders v. Chippi
This text of Patrick Sanders v. Chippi (Patrick Sanders v. Chippi) 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.
Opinion
Case: 17-20782 Document: 00514630953 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/06/2018
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 17-20782 United States Court of Appeals
Summary Calendar Fifth Circuit
FILED September 6, 2018
PATRICK DEWAYNE SANDERS, Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Plaintiff-Appellant
v.
SERGEANT CHIPPI; HOUSTON POLICE DEPARTMENT,
Defendants-Appellees
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 4:17-CV-3490
Before STEWART, Chief Judge, and GRAVES and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Patrick Dewayne Sanders, Texas prisoner # 2549493, appeals the dismissal of his in forma pauperis (IFP) 42 U.S.C. § 1983 suit; the district court dismissed the suit as time barred and, therefore, frivolous. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(b)(i); see Moore v. McDonald, 30 F.3d 616, 620 (5th Cir. 1994). However, Sanders does not acknowledge, much less address, the district court’s time-bar holding, and he has therefore abandoned any challenge to the
* 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. Case: 17-20782 Document: 00514630953 Page: 2 Date Filed: 09/06/2018
No. 17-20782
dismissal of his suit as time barred. See Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 225 (5th Cir. 1993); Brinkmann v. Dallas Cnty. Deputy Sheriff Abner, 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987). The appeal is DISMISSED AS FRIVOLOUS. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2. The district court’s dismissal of Sanders’s complaint and our dismissal of this appeal each count as a strike for purposes of § 1915(g). See Adepegba v. Hammons, 103 F.3d 383, 387 (5th Cir. 1996). Sanders is WARNED that, if he accumulates three strikes, he will no longer be allowed to proceed IFP 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.” § 1915(g).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Patrick Sanders v. Chippi, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/patrick-sanders-v-chippi-ca5-2018.