People of State-CO v. Williams

F I L E D
United States Court of Appeals
Tenth Circuit
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS APR 17 2003
TENTH CIRCUIT PATRICK FISHER
Clerk
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF
COLORADO, CITY OF COLORADO
SPRINGS,
Plaintiff - Appellee, No. 02-1402
(D.C. No. 02-CR-299-Z)
v. (D. Colorado)
GEORGE ALLEN WILLIAMS,
Defendant - Appellant.
ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
Before SEYMOUR, MURPHY, and O’BRIEN, Circuit Judges.
George Allen Williams moves pro se for leave to proceed in forma
pauperis on his appeal of the district court’s summary remand of his state
criminal prosecution and its subsequent denial of his motion for reconsideration.
*
After examining appellant’s brief and the appellate record, this panel has
determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the
determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2) and 10th Cir. R.
34.1(G). The case is therefore submitted without oral argument. This order and
judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case,
res judicata, or collateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the citation of
orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the
terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.
For the reasons set forth below, we deny his motion and dismiss the appeal.
To be granted in forma pauperis status, Mr. Williams must demonstrate the
existence of a reasoned, nonfrivolous argument on the law and the facts in
support of reversing the district court’s dismissal of his action. See
DeBardeleben v. Quinlan, 937 F.2d 502, 505 (10th Cir. 1991). Mr. Williams
cannot meet this burden.
Mr. Williams attempted to remove the Colorado state criminal prosecution
against him to federal court under 28 U.S.C. § 1443(2). However, as the district
court explained in both of its orders, that provision applies only to “federal
officers or agents and those authorized to act with or for them in affirmatively
executing duties under any federal law providing for equal civil rights.” City of
Greenwood, Miss. v. Peacock, 384 U.S. 808, 824 (1966). Mr. Williams has
presented no argument or evidence that he is a federal officer or assisted a federal
officer in performing official duties providing for equal rights. Because his
appeal is therefore frivolous, he fails to meet the standard for in forma pauperis
status and his appeal must be dismissed under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(I).
Accordingly, we DENY the motion to proceed in forma pauperis and
DISMISS the appeal.
ENTERED FOR THE COURT
Stephanie K. Seymour
Circuit Judge
-2-