Case: 18-14894 Date Filed: 08/13/2019 Page: 1 of 2
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 18-14894
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 1:18-cv-02859-SCJ
JERRELL BERGER,
Petitioner-Appellant,
versus
ROBERT ADAMS,
Warden,
Respondent-Appellee.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Georgia
________________________
(August 13, 2019)
Before MARCUS, JILL PRYOR, and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Case: 18-14894 Date Filed: 08/13/2019 Page: 2 of 2
Jerrell Berger, a Georgia state prisoner proceeding pro se, appeals the
district court’s dismissal, without prejudice, of his
28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas corpus
petition for his failure to comply with a court order. He argues the merits of his
habeas petition, contending that he received ineffective assistance of counsel.
We generally review de novo a district court’s dismissal of a § 2254 petition.
Clark v. Crosby,
335 F.3d 1303, 1307 (11th Cir. 2003). However, where a district
court dismisses an action for failure to comply with court rules, we review for
abuse of discretion. Betty K Agencies, Ltd. v. M/V Monada,
432 F.3d 1333, 1337
(11th Cir. 2005). While we construe briefs filed by pro se litigants liberally,
“issues not briefed on appeal by a pro se litigant are deemed abandoned.” Timson
v. Sampson,
518 F.3d 870, 874 (11th Cir. 2008) (per curiam).
Here, because Berger failed to address the dismissal of his case—the only
appealable issue—he has abandoned any argument regarding the dismissal, and
thus, we affirm.
AFFIRMED.
2
