Stafford v. Zwicke, No. 23-50623 (5th Cir. 2024)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 23-50623 Document: 48-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/25/2024 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ____________ United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 23-50623 Summary Calendar ____________ FILED March 25, 2024 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Tyrone Stafford, Plaintiff—Appellant, versus Arnold S. Zwicke, Executive Sheriff, Guadalupe County Sheriff’s Office; Magistrate Judges, Guadalupe County; County/District Attorney, Guadalupe County; District Court of Texas Judges 274th, 25th, 2nd 25th, Guadalupe County; Guadalupe County Commissioners; Greg Abbott; Ken Paxton; Dave Wilborn, Guadalupe County Attorney; Arlene Gay; Tillie Luke; Guadalupe County Court at Law #1; Guadalupe County Court at Law #2; Supreme Court of Texas; Corporal F/N/U Doss, Guadalupe County Sheriff’s Office; G. I. Castillo, Guadalupe County Sheriff’s Office; Deputy F/N/U/ Gipson, Guadalupe County Sheriff’s Office, Defendants—Appellees. ______________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 5:22-CV-314 ______________________________ Case: 23-50623 Document: 48-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/25/2024 Before Smith, Southwick, and Wilson, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam: * Tyrone Stafford filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint alleging that deputies of the Guadalupe County Sheriff’s Office used excessive force during a traffic stop in January 2022. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants, concluding that Stafford failed to demonstrate a constitutional violation. Stafford moves to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) on appeal, which constitutes a challenge to the district court’s certification that any appeal would not be taken in good faith because Stafford will not present a nonfrivolous appellate issue. See Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 202 (5th Cir. 1997). Stafford’s motion to supplement his reply brief is GRANTED. Stafford devotes a majority of his initial brief to challenging the legality of his arrest. He does not meaningfully question the district court’s reasons for finding that the deputies did not use excessive force and therefore were entitled to qualified immunity. Thus, Stafford abandons the primary issue on appeal. See Brinkmann v. Dallas Cnty. Deputy Sheriff Abner, 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987). Furthermore, Stafford abandons his § 1983 claims against the remaining defendants by not raising them on appeal. See Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 224–25 (5th Cir. 1993). Accordingly, Stafford fails to raise a nonfrivolous issue with respect to the summary judgment. See Baugh, 117 F.3d at 202 n.24; Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a). The appeal is without arguable merit and is thus frivolous. See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir. 1983). Accordingly, the motion to proceed IFP on appeal is DENIED, and the appeal is DISMISSED. See Baugh, 117 F.3d at 202 n.24; 5th Cir. R. 42.2. _____________________ * This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
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.
