Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Motions
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Motions
Judges

JOSEPH JUDE OLIVER v. MARK BALDWIN, et al

MEMORANDUM

FRANKLIN VAN ANTWERPEN, District Judge

Plaintiff, a state prisoner, is seeking to bring a civil action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 without prepayment of fees. Plaintiff alleges that the defendants conspired to deny his rights to due process and adequate assistance of counsel in connection with the appeal of one of his criminal convictions. He seeks monetary relief.

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), a prisoner who on three or more prior occasions while incarcerated has filed an action in a federal court that was dismissed as frivolous, malicious, or for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, must be denied in forma pauperis status unless he is in imminent danger of serious physical injury at the time that the complaint is filed. Abdul-Akbar v. McKelvie, 239 F.3d 307 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 533 U.S. 953 (2001).

Plaintiff has, prior to the instant action, filed "three or more" civil rights actions in this Court which were dismissed as frivolous. Furthermore, nothing in this complaint suggests that the plaintiff is in imminent danger of serious physical injury.

The following civil rights actions filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania were dismissed as frivolous: (1) Civil Action No. 77-2968 was dismissed by order dated September 8, 1977; (2) Civil Action No. 83-1674 was dismissed by order dated June 13, 1983; and (3) Civil Action No. 99-1868 was dismissed as frivolous without prejudice by order dated June 2, 1999, and plaintiff's motion to reopen the case was denied by order dated April 19, 2002.

Accordingly, plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis will be denied. An appropriate order follows.

ORDER

AND NOW, to wit, this day of May, 2004, in accordance with the accompanying memorandum, IT IS ORDERED that plaintiff's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is DENIED pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

OLIVER v. BALDWIN
(May 17, 2004)