Yoes v. Hall ( 2002 )


Menu:
  •                IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
    No. 02-10723
    Conference Calendar
    NORMAN W. YOES,
    Plaintiff-Appellant,
    versus
    RAY HALL, JR., Attorney at Law,
    Defendant-Appellee.
    --------------------
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Northern District of Texas
    USDC No. 4:02-CV-461-Y
    --------------------
    December 12, 2002
    Before JOLLY, JONES, and WIENER, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:*
    Norman W. Yoes, Texas prisoner # 0249027, appeals the
    dismissal of his 
    42 U.S.C. § 1983
     complaint as frivolous and for
    failure to state a claim under 
    28 U.S.C. §§ 1915
    (e) and 1915A.
    Yoes argues that appellee Ray Hall, Jr., Yoes’ court-appointed
    attorney, rendered ineffective assistance.    Yoes seeks this
    court’s assistance in helping him obtain the appointment of
    substitute counsel.
    *
    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    that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 02-10723
    -2-
    To establish liability under 
    42 U.S.C. § 1983
    , Yoes must
    demonstrate a violation of his rights secured by the Constitution
    or laws of the United States committed by a person acting under
    color of state law.    See Leffall v. Dallas Indep. Sch. Dist., 
    28 F.3d 521
    , 525 (5th Cir. 1994).    Yoes’ court-appointed attorney is
    not a state actor for purposes of 
    42 U.S.C. § 1983
     liability.
    See Polk County v. Dodson, 
    454 U.S. 312
    , 324-25 (1981); see also
    Mills v. Criminal Dist. Court No. 3, 
    837 F.2d 677
    , 679 (5th Cir.
    1988).   Accordingly, the district court’s dismissal of Yoes’
    complaint as frivolous and for failure to state a claim is
    AFFIRMED.
    The district court’s dismissal of Yoes’ 
    42 U.S.C. § 1983
    complaint as frivolous resulted in Yoes’ second strike under 
    28 U.S.C. § 1915
    (g).     See Adepegba v. Hammons, 
    103 F.3d 383
    , 387-88
    (5th Cir. 1996).    We caution Yoes that once he accumulates three
    strikes, he may not 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.     See 
    28 U.S.C. § 1915
    (g).