Sanders v. Alford, et al

* 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-40634
Conference Calendar
TOMMY E. SANDERS,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
J. E. ALFORD, Warden; PATRICIA
ADAMS, Property Room Supervisor,
Defendants-Appellees.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Texas
USDC No. 9:99-CV-194
- - - - - - - - - -
December 13, 2000
Before DAVIS, STEWART, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Tommy E. Sanders, a Texas prisoner (# 744097), appeals from
the district court’s sua sponte dismissal of his 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983 civil rights complaint as frivolous, pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(e)(2). Sanders alleged that the defendants confiscated
from him an $8.95 “multi-outlet plug” he had purchased at the
commissary of his previous prison. The district court did not
abuse its discretion in concluding that Sanders had failed to
state a cognizable constitutional claim regarding the deprivation

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 00-40634
-2-
of his property because Texas provides an adequate
postdeprivation remedy. See Berry v. Brady, 192 F.3d 504, 507
(5th Cir. 1999); Murphy v. Collins, 26 F.3d 541, 543 (5th Cir.
1994).
Because the appeal is frivolous, it is DISMISSED. See
Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir. 1983); 5TH CIR.
R. 42.2.
The dismissal of this appeal and the dismissal as frivolous
by the district court each count as a “strike” for purposes of 28
U.S.C. § 1915(g). See Adepegba v. Hammons, 103 F.3d 383, 387-88
(5th Cir. 1996). We caution Sanders that once he accumulates
three strikes, he may not proceed in forma pauperis 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 § 28 U.S.C. 1915(g).
APPEAL DISMISSED; SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.

-- 2 of 2 --