Colgrove v. Martin

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 95-40824
Summary Calendar
RAY COLGROVE,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
C.W. MARTIN, Warden; JAMES A. LYNAUGH;
UNIDENTIFIED BENNETT; and ANDY
COLLINS,
Defendants-Appellees.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Texas
USDC No. 9:94-CV-11
-- - - - - - - - -
March 22, 1996
Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Ray Colgrove appeals the district court’s 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(d) dismissal of his pro se, in forma pauperis (IFP), 42
U.S.C. § 1983 action. Colgrove did not allege sufficient facts
to demonstrate that prisoners were aware of facts that a
substantial risk of harm existed regarding his failure-to-protect
*
Pursuant to Local Rule 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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 Local Rule
47.5.4.
No. 95-40824
- 2 -
claim. Therefore, Colgrove does not demonstrate that the
defendants were deliberately indifferent to his right to be free
from the violence of other inmates. See Farmer v. Brennan, 114
S. Ct. 1970, 1979 (1994). Colgrove has also failed to
demonstrate that the defendants were deliberately indifferent to
his serious medical needs. See Mendoza v. Lynaugh, 989 F.2d 191,
193 (5th Cir. 1993).
We warn Colgrove that the filing of frivolous appeals will
result in additional sanctions. E.g., Smith v. McCleod, 946 F.2d
417, 418 (5th Cir. 1991); Jackson v. Carpenter, 921 F.2d 68, 69
(5th Cir. 1991). If Colgrove has any other appeals pending in
this court at this time, he should review them in light of the
foregoing warning and move to withdraw any appeal that is
frivolous.
AFFIRMED; SANCTIONS WARNING ISSUED.