Thomson v. Houston Police Dept, et al

* 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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
November 30, 2004
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-20167
Summary Calendar
B. JOE THOMSON,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
HOUSTON POLICE DEPARTMENT; SOUTH TEXAS COLLEGE OF LAW,
Defendants-Appellees.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:03-CV-3908
--------------------
Before GARZA, DeMOSS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
B. Joe Thomson challenges the district court’s denial of his
motion for a new trial and his application to proceed in forma
pauperis (“IFP”) on appeal following the dismissal of his civil
rights complaint as barred by res judicata. Thomson is
effectively challenging the district court’s certification that
he should not be granted IFP status because his appeal is not
taken in good faith. See Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 202 (5th
Cir. 1997); 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3); FED. R. APP. P. 24(a).

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 04-20167
-2-
Thomson has not demonstrated that he will raise a
nonfrivolous issue on appeal. See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215,
220 (5th Cir. 1983). Accordingly, Thomson’s motion to proceed
IFP is DENIED, and his appeal is DISMISSED as frivolous. 5TH CIR.
R. 42.2; Baugh, 117 F.3d at 202 n.24.
IFP DENIED; APPEAL DISMISSED AS FRIVOLOUS.

-- 2 of 2 --