Lee v. United States, 120518 FED5, 18-30531
|Opinion Judge:||PER CURIAM|
|Party Name:||DEON TREMELL LEE, Plaintiff-Appellant v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT; UNITED STATES CONGRESS; STATE OF LOUISIANA, Defendants-Appellees|
|Judge Panel:||Before JONES, ELROD, and ENGELHARDT, Circuit Judges.|
|Case Date:||December 05, 2018|
|Court:||United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit|
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana USDC No. 2:18-CV-182
Before JONES, ELROD, and ENGELHARDT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM [*]
Deon Tremell Lee, Louisiana prisoner # 375231, moves for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) in this appeal of the sua sponte dismissal of his case. The motion is a challenge to the district court's certification that the appeal is not taken in good faith. See Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 202 (5th Cir. 1997).
Lee fails to address the district court's reasons for finding his case to be frivolous. Pro se briefs are afforded liberal construction. See Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 225 (5th Cir. 1993). Nevertheless, when an appellant fails to identify any error in the district court's analysis, it is the same as if the appellant had not appealed the decision. Brinkmann v. Dallas Cty. Deputy Sheriff Abner, 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987).
Because Lee has failed to challenge any factual or legal aspect of the district court's disposition of his claims or the certification that his appeal is not taken in good faith, he has abandoned the critical issue of his appeal. See id. Thus, the appeal lacks arguable merit. See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir. 1983). Accordingly, the motion for leave to proceed IFP is denied, and the appeal is dismissed as frivolous. See Baugh, 117 F.3d at 202 n.24; 5th Cir. R. 42.2.
The dismissal of the complaint by the district court and the dismissal of this appeal as frivolous constitute...
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP