William v. Reed, 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 01-20966
Conference Calendar
EMMITT WILLIAM, III,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
DR. R. REED; DR. C.V. DINH,
Defendants-Appellees.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. H-00-CV-4135
--------------------
February 20, 2002
Before JOLLY, JONES, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
The motion by Emmitt William, III, Texas prisoner
# 849867, for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) on
appeal is DENIED. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3); FED. R. APP. P.
24(a); Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 202 (5th Cir. 1997). The
instant appeal is without arguable merit and is thus frivolous.
Accordingly, it is DISMISSED. See Baugh, 117 F.2d at 202 n.24;
Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-220 (5th Cir. 1983).
Both the district court’s dismissal of William’s complaint
and this court’s dismissal of this appeal count as “strikes” for

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 01-20966
-2-
purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). See Adepegba v. Hammons, 103
F.3d 383, 385-87 (5th Cir. 1996). William is CAUTIONED that if
he accumulates a third “strike” under § 1915(g), he will not be
able to proceed IFP 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; IFP MOTION DENIED; THREE-STRIKES WARNING
ISSUED.

-- 2 of 2 --