Dadi v. Haro ( 2003 )


Menu:
  •                                                          United States Court of Appeals
    Fifth Circuit
    F I L E D
    IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT                  June 24, 2003
    Charles R. Fulbruge III
    Clerk
    No. 02-30930
    Conference Calendar
    ALI REZA DADI,
    Petitioner-Appellant,
    versus
    JOSEPH M. HARO,
    Respondent-Appellee.
    --------------------
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Western District of Louisiana
    USDC No. 01-CV-1267
    --------------------
    Before DeMOSS, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:*
    Ali Reza Dadi (“Dadi”), federal prisoner number 59270-079,
    appeals the district court’s dismissal with prejudice of his
    application for a federal writ of habeas corpus.
    Dadi did not raise his double jeopardy clause argument until
    his reply brief, and it is deemed abandoned.     See Cousin v. Trans
    Union Corp., 
    246 F.3d 359
    , 373 n.22 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 
    534 U.S. 951
     (2001).     Dadi argues for the first time on appeal that
    various actions by the investigating officer and the Bureau of
    *
    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    that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
    No. 02-30930
    -2-
    Prisons constitute the obstruction of justice and violated his
    due process and equal protection rights.   This court does not
    consider issues raised for the first time on appeal “unless they
    involve purely legal questions and failure to consider them would
    result in manifest injustice.”   Blanks v. Murco Drilling Corp.,
    
    766 F.2d 891
    , 897 (5th Cir. 1985).   Because these issues do not
    involve purely legal questions and because Dadi could have raised
    these issues in his application but did not, there is no manifest
    injustice in declining to address these issues on appeal.   See
    
    id.
    As there is no argument properly before this court, the
    appeal is frivolous and is dismissed as such.   See Howard v.
    King, 
    707 F.2d 215
    , 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983); 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.
    APPEAL DISMISSED.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 02-30930

Filed Date: 6/24/2003

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/17/2021