Eddie Johnson v. Jacqueline Chenier , 438 F. App'x 251 ( 2011 )


Menu:
  •      Case: 11-20003     Document: 00511524820         Page: 1     Date Filed: 06/29/2011
    IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT  United States Court of Appeals
    Fifth Circuit
    FILED
    June 29, 2011
    No. 11-20003
    Summary Calendar                        Lyle W. Cayce
    Clerk
    EDDIE DON JOHNSON,
    Plaintiff-Appellant
    v.
    JACQUELINE CHENIER, Supervising Parole Officer; RISSIE OWENS,
    Chairman; ROI DICKERSON, Supervising Parole Officer; CHIAZOR
    OFOROILE, Hearing Officer; JOSEPH PRESIFKE, Attorney,
    Defendants-Appellees
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Southern District of Texas
    USDC No. 4:10-CV-2881
    Before WIENER, PRADO, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:*
    Eddie Don Johnson, Texas prisoner # 364033, proceeding pro se and in
    forma pauperis (IFP) appeals the district court’s dismissal of his 42 U.S.C.
    § 1983 complaint as frivolous and for failure to state a claim. See 28 U.S.C.
    §§ 1915A(b)(1), 1915(e)(2)(B)(i), (ii). Although Johnson argues the merits of some
    of his claims on appeal, he wholly fails to challenge the district court’s reasons
    *
    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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
    be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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.
    Case: 11-20003    Document: 00511524820      Page: 2   Date Filed: 06/29/2011
    No. 11-20003
    for the dismissal of his claims, specifically that (1) to the extent that Johnson
    sought to void his conviction and obtain immediate release from prison, the
    claims sounded in habeas and not in civil rights and, thus, would be dismissed
    without prejudice for failure to state a viable civil rights claim; (2) Johnson’s
    claims for monetary damages for wrongful incarceration were barred by Heck v.
    Humphrey, 
    512 U.S. 477
    (1994); and (3) Johnson’s § 1983 claims and his claims
    asserted under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. § 12132,
    were time barred, and, in the alternative, that Johnson had failed to allege a
    nonfrivolous ADA claim. By failing to brief any argument challenging the
    district court’s reasons for dismissal, Johnson has abandoned the only ground
    for appeal.   See Yohey v. Collins, 
    985 F.2d 222
    , 224-25 (5th Cir. 1993);
    Brinkmann v. Dallas County Deputy Sheriff Abner, 
    813 F.2d 744
    , 748 (5th Cir.
    1987).
    Johnson’s appeal is without arguable merit and therefore frivolous. See
    Howard v. King, 
    707 F.2d 215
    , 220 (5th Cir. 1983). Because it is frivolous, it is
    dismissed. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2. Johnson’s motion for the appointment of
    counsel is denied.
    The district court’s dismissal of the complaint and this court’s dismissal
    of the appeal count as strikes for purposes of § 1915(g). See Adepegba v.
    Hammons, 
    103 F.3d 383
    , 387-88 (5th Cir. 1996); see also Patton v. Jefferson
    Correctional Center, 
    136 F.3d 458
    , 462-63 (5th Cir. 1998).            Johnson is
    CAUTIONED that if he accumulates three strikes under § 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 § 1915(g).
    APPEAL DISMISSED; SANCTION WARNING ISSUED; MOTION
    DENIED.
    2