Derrick Allen v. J Santiago, et al

[DO NOT PUBLISH]
In the
United States Court of Appeals
For the Eleventh Circuit
____________________
No. 22-11946
Non-Argument Calendar
____________________
DERRICK ALLEN,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
J SANTIAGO,
Awp,
C MAIORANA,
Warden, et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
____________________
USCA11 Case: 22-11946 Document: 27-1 Date Filed: 09/06/2023 Page: 1 of 3

-- 1 of 3 --

2 Opinion of the Court 22-11946
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Florida
D.C. Docket No. 3:22-cv-03145-TKW-EMT
____________________
Before NEWSOM, G RANT, and L AGOA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Derrick Allen, pro se, appeals the district court’s dismissal
without prejudice of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action as malicious under
28 U.S.C. § 1915A. He argues that the form complaint that he filled
out was ambiguous, and that he did not intentionally misrepresent
his litigation history or otherwise act in bad faith.
We review for abuse of discretion a sua sponte dismissal un-
der § 1915A(b)(1), which requires district courts to dismiss mali-
cious filings. Daker v. Ward, 999 F.3d 1300, 1307 (11th Cir. 2021).
An action is malicious when a prisoner misrepresents his prior liti-
gation history on a complaint form requiring disclosure of such his-
tory and signs the complaint under penalty of perjury. See Rivera v.
Allin, 144 F.3d 719, 731 (11th Cir. 1998) (counting as a strike under
§ 1915(g) an action that was dismissed for an abuse of the legal pro-
cess because the inmate lied under penalty of perjury about a prior
lawsuit), overruled on other grounds by Jones v. Bock, 549 U.S. 199
(2007).
The district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing
Allen’s complaint without prejudice because he failed to disclose
all of his relevant prior litigation, and the court was within its
USCA11 Case: 22-11946 Document: 27-1 Date Filed: 09/06/2023 Page: 2 of 3

-- 2 of 3 --

22-11946 Opinion of the Court 3
discretion to dismiss as malicious because of that failure. Accord-
ingly, we affirm the district court’s dismissal of the action without
prejudice.
AFFIRMED.1
1 Additionally, Allen’s motion for appointment of counsel is DENIED, and his
motion to consolidate the appeal with Case Number 22-13808 is DENIED as
MOOT.
USCA11 Case: 22-11946 Document: 27-1 Date Filed: 09/06/2023 Page: 3 of 3

-- 3 of 3 --