Williams v. Copes ( 2003 )

United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT October 22, 2003
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 03-30496
Conference Calendar
JERMAINE WILLIAMS,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
GARY COPES; DAVID VIATOR; RILEY, Major;
M. IVORY,
Defendants-Appellees.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Louisiana
USDC No. 02-CV-1075
--------------------
Before KING, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Jermaine Williams, Louisiana inmate # 366285, appeals the
dismissal of his civil rights suit, filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983 as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e). Williams fails to
show that the district court abused its discretion when it
dismissed his due process claims surrounding a disciplinary
hearing as frivolous because Williams lacked a liberty interest
in the punishment he received. Siglar v. Hightower, 112 F.3d
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 03-30496
-2-
191, 193 (5th Cir. 1997); Sandin v. Conner, 515 U.S. 472, 483-84
(1995); Madison v. Parker, 104 F.3d 765, 767 (5th Cir. 1997).
Williams likewise fails to show that the district court abused
its discretion when it dismissed his personal injury claim as
frivolous inasmuch as allegations of negligence do not implicate
the Constitution. Daniels v. Williams, 474 U.S. 327, 328 (1986);
Salas v. Carpenter, 980 F.2d 299, 306-07 (5th Cir. 1992).
This appeal is without arguable merit. It should therefore
be dismissed as frivolous. See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215,
219-20 (5th Cir. 1983); 5TH CIR. R. 42.2. The district court’s
dismissal of the instant case as frivolous and for failure to
exhaust and this court's dismissal of Williams’s appeal as
frivolous count as two strikes against him for purposes of 28
U.S.C. § 1915(g). See Adepegba v. Hammons, 103 F.3d 383, 387-88
(5th Cir. 1996); 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). Therefore,
Williams is WARNED that if he accumulates three "strikes" under
28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), he will not be able to 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).
AFFIRMED.