IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-10279
Conference Calendar
JERRY RICKY HANNAH,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
NFN MARTIN, Officer, Price Daniel Unit;
NFN HOOSER, Officer, Price Daniel Unit;
TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE-
INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION, Price Daniel Unit,
Defendants-Appellees.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 5:01-CV-22-C
--------------------
June 14, 2001
Before WIENER, DeMOSS, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Jerry Ricky Hannah, Texas prisoner number 897277, appeals
the district court’s dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 suit as
frivolous. He contends that the defendants lost his tennis shoes
and that his due process rights were violated when he was not
given fair compensation for the shoes. The district court did
not abuse its discretion in concluding that Hannah’s claim for
the deprivation of his personal property was frivolous. See
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
No. 01-10279
-2-
Hudson v. Palmer, 468 U.S. 517, 533 (1984); Harper v. Showers,
174 F.3d 716, 718 & n.3 (5th Cir. 1999). Texas has an adequate
postdeprivation remedy for confiscation of prisoner property.
Cathey v. Guenther, 47 F.3d 162, 164 (5th Cir. 1995). Hannah’s
appeal is without arguable merit and is frivolous. See Howard v.
King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983). Because the appeal
is frivolous, it is DISMISSED. See 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). Hannah therefore has two “strikes” under
28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). We caution Hannah 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; SANCTIONS WARNING ISSUED.
Hannah v. Martin
Combined Opinion