eLaws | Code of Federal Regulations | United States Code |
 All Courts
 Federal Courts
 US Court of Appeals Cases
 Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
 2023-02

Clyce v. Butler ( 2023 )


Menu:
 
  • Case: 22-10294        Document: 00516645298             Page: 1      Date Filed: 02/14/2023
United States Court of Appeals
for the Fifth Circuit
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
____________                                    FILED
February 14, 2023
No. 22-10294                              Lyle W. Cayce
Summary Calendar                                 Clerk
____________
Chance Marcus Clyce, and on behalf of all those similarly situated,
Plaintiff—Appellant,
versus
Frederick Farley, Investigator and Supervisor for Hunt County Juvenile
Detention Center, individually and in his official capacity; Kenneth
Wright, individually and in his official capacity; Shanigia Williams,
individually and in her official capacity,
Defendants—Appellees.
______________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 3:15-CV-793
______________________________
Before Barksdale, Higginson, and Ho, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam: *
Chance Marcus Clyce, proceeding pro se on appeal, filed an amended
complaint claiming that defendants, all of whom were employees at a juvenile
detention center where Clyce was held in 2008, violated his constitutional
_____________________
*
This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 22-10294        Document: 00516645298           Page: 2    Date Filed: 02/14/2023
No. 22-10294
rights.     Clyce’s claims against Frederick Farley were dismissed with
prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25(a)(1) (requiring dismissal
of claims against deceased party if no motion to substitute timely filed).
Defendants Kenneth Wright and Shanigia Williams were granted summary
judgment on qualified-immunity grounds.
Clyce’s brief in this court essentially recounts his version of the facts
giving rise to his complaint, providing only one citation. Although pro se
briefs are construed liberally, issues must be briefed to preserve them. E.g.,
Yohey v. Collins,
    985 F.2d 222
    , 225 (5th Cir. 1993). Clyce fails to address the
district court’s concluding that Wright and Williams were entitled to
qualified immunity and that his claims against Farley were subject to
dismissal with prejudice under Rule 25(a)(1). Therefore, he has abandoned
any challenge to those rulings. E.g., Brinkmann v. Dallas Cnty. Deputy Sheriff
Abner,
    813 F.2d 744
    , 748 (5th Cir. 1987) (“We will not raise and discuss legal
issues that [appellant] has failed to assert.”); see also Fed. R. App. P.
28(a)(8) (appellant’s brief must contain his contentions and citations to
authority).
To the extent he contends the court improperly viewed the facts and
drew inferences in favor of defendants, see Tolan v. Cotton,
    572 U.S. 650
    , 657
(2014) (court must resolve disputed issues in favor of non-movant), those
contentions are unsupported by the record. See Renfroe v. Parker,
    974 F.3d 594
    , 599 (5th Cir. 2020) (no error where non-movant “did not offer any
competent evidence of her own alleged facts”). Nor does the record support
Clyce’s assertion that the district court perfunctorily dismissed his case as
frivolous at the first opportunity to do so. Finally, we need not review
Clyce’s claim that his former attorney rendered ineffective assistance. E.g.,
2
Case: 22-10294     Document: 00516645298           Page: 3   Date Filed: 02/14/2023
No. 22-10294
Sanchez v. U.S. Postal Serv.,
    785 F.2d 1236
    , 1237 (5th Cir. 1986) (“right to
effective assistance of counsel does not apply to civil proceedings”).
AFFIRMED.
3