Alexander v. Carlow ( 2004 )

United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT October 21, 2004
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 03-41673
Conference Calendar
BARRY ALEXANDER,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
JAMES M. CARLOW, Judge Bowie County; GREG ABBOTT, Attorney
General State of Texas,
Defendants-Appellees.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Texas
USDC No. 5:03-CV-186
--------------------
Before JOLLY, JONES, and WIENER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Barry Alexander appeals from the district court’s dismissal
with prejudice of his civil-rights lawsuit, filed pursuant to
42 U.S.C. § 1983, for failure to state a claim upon which relief
may be granted. This court reviews such a dismissal de novo.
See Cinel v. Connick, 15 F.3d 1338, 1341 (5th Cir. 1994).
Alexander argues that: (1) the district court judge should
have recused himself; (2) the district court failed to recognize
the denial of certain previous lawsuits involving Alexander and
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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. 03-41673
-2-
his family members; and (3) the district court failed to provide
Alexander with a jury trial regarding his claims. The record
does not support Alexander’s argument that the district court
judge should have recused himself. See Liteky v. United States,
510 U.S. 540, 555 (1994). Alexander’s argument regarding
previous lawsuits fails to raise a cognizable issue for review.
Moreover, Alexander was not deprived of his right to a jury
trial. See, e.g., Odum v. Penn Mut. Life Ins. Co., 288 F.2d 744,
748 (5th Cir. 1961).
Alexander’s appeal is without arguable merit and is
frivolous. See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir.
1983). Because the appeal is frivolous, it is DISMISSED. See
5TH CIR. R. 42.2. We caution Alexander that the filing of
frivolous appeals and motions will invite the imposition of a
sanction.
APPEAL DISMISSED AS FRIVOLOUS; SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.