Ricky Ewing v. Druetta Taylor, et al, No. 17-60400 (5th Cir. 2017)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 17-60400 Document: 00514264361 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/07/2017 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 17-60400 FILED December 7, 2017 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk RICKY RONNELL EWING, Plaintiff-Appellant v. DRUETTA TAYLOR, Case Manager; UNKNOWN WALKER, Officer, UNKNOWN MILLER, Officer; Defendants-Appellees Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi USDC No. 1:16-CV-93 Before DENNIS, SOUTHWICK, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Ricky Ronnell Ewing, Mississippi prisoner # 34353, moves for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) on appeal from the dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. The district court denied Ewing leave to proceed IFP on appeal, certifying that the appeal was not taken in good faith because Ewing had not sought review of any issue that was arguable on its merits. 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. * Case: 17-60400 Document: 00514264361 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/07/2017 No. 17-60400 Ewing pleads his indigency but does not challenge any legal aspect of the district court’s disposition of his § 1983 complaint or the certification that his appeal is not taken in good faith. Accordingly, he has abandoned the critical issues of his appeal. See Brinkmann v. Dallas County Deputy Sheriff Abner, 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987). Thus, the appeal lacks arguable merit and is therefore frivolous. See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir. 1983). Ewing’s motion for leave to proceed IFP on appeal is DENIED, and his appeal is DISMISSED as frivolous. See Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 202 n.24 (5th Cir. 1997); 5TH CIR. R. 42.2. The dismissal of this appeal as frivolous counts as a strike under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). See § 1915(g); Coleman v. Tollefson, 135 S. Ct. 1759, 1763-64 (2015). Ewing has at least two other strikes. Ewing v. Richie, et al., No. 1760176 (5th Cir. Nov. 15, 2017); Ewing v. Jone, et al., No. 1:15-CV-254 (S.D. Miss. Feb. 1, 2016). As Ewing has accumulated at least three strikes under § 1915(g), he may not proceed IFP in any civil action or appeal filed in a court of the United States while he is incarcerated or detained in any facility unless he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. See § 1915(g). Ewing is further warned that any future frivolous or repetitive filings in this court or any court subject to this court’s jurisdiction will subject him to additional sanctions. MOTION DENIED; APPEAL DISMISSED; § 1915(g) BAR IMPOSED. 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
