Teague v. United States of America, No. 2:2007cv00326 - Document 54 (D.N.M. 2020)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER DENYING LEAVE TO PROCEED ON APPEAL WITHOUT PREPAYMENT OF COSTS OR FEES by Sr. District Judge Robert C. Brack re: 48 MOTION for Leave to Appeal in forma pauperis. (bc) Modified document type on 12/15/2020 (am).
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Teague v. United States of America Doc. 54 Case 2:07-cv-00326-RB-LCS Document 54 Filed 12/14/20 Page 1 of 2 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO ANTHONY DAVID TEAGUE Movant, vs. No. CV 07-0326 RB/LCS No. CR 03-1133 RB UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER DENYING LEAVE TO PROCEED ON APPEAL WITHOUT PREPAYMENT OF COSTS OR FEES THIS MATTER is before the Court on Mr. Teague’s Motion for Leave to Proceed IFP. (Doc. 48.) For the reasons explained below, the Court concludes that Mr. Teague’s appeal is not taken in good faith and, therefore, will deny his motion. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), “[a]n appeal may not be taken in forma pauperis if the trial court certifies in writing that it is not taken in good faith.” For purposes of § 1915(a)(3), a good faith appeal is one that presents a “reasoned, nonfrivolous argument on the law and facts in support of the issues raised on appeal.” Caravalho v. Pugh, 177 F.3d 1177, 1179 (10th Cir. 1999) (quotations omitted); see also Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 442–50 (1962). In determining good faith, the Court should not decide the merits of the issues on appeal but, instead, should only reach the question of whether the appellant has presented a reasoned and nonfrivolous argument. See Ragan v. Cox, 305 F.2d 58, 59–60 (10th Cir. 1962). Mr. Teague fails to identify the existence of a reasoned, nonfrivolous argument on the law and facts to support his proposed appellate issues. (See Docs. 44; 48.) For this reason, as well as 1 Dockets.Justia.com Case 2:07-cv-00326-RB-LCS Document 54 Filed 12/14/20 Page 2 of 2 the reasons set forth in the Court’s October 16, 2020 Memorandum Opinion and Order and December 7, 2020 Memorandum Opinion and Order denying Mr. Teague’s Fifth Rule 60(b) Motion and his Motion to Alter or Amend Judgment (see Docs. 42; 50), the Court will deny Mr. Teague’s Motion for Leave to Proceed IFP and certify that his appeal is not taken in good faith. The Court advises Mr. Teague that he may file a motion for leave to proceed on appeal without prepayment of fees in the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit within 30 days after service of this Order. See Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(5). “The motion must include a copy of the affidavit filed in the district court and the district court’s statement of reasons for its action.” Id. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Motion for Leave to Proceed IFP is DENIED; the Court CERTIFIES that the appeal is not taken in good faith, and the Court DIRECTS the Clerk of the Court to notify the Court of Appeals of this denial and certification. ________________________________ ROBERT C. BRACK SENIOR U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE 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.
