Tercero-Aranda v. Stephens, 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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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
August 21, 2006
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-40031
Summary Calendar
ROQUE TERCERO-ARANDA,
Petitioner-Appellant,
versus
WILLIAM STEPHENS, Ex-Warden; JON KEY; GAINES COUNTY SHERIFF,
Respondents-Appellees.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. 2:04-CV-458
--------------------
Before JOLLY, GARZA, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Roque Tercero-Aranda, Texas prisoner # 805045, seeks leave
to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) to appeal the district court’s
denial of permission to proceed IFP on his putative 28 U.S.C.
§ 2241 petition. The district court certified that the appeal
was not taken in good faith. By moving for leave to proceed IFP,
Tercero-Aranda is challenging the district court’s certification
decision. See Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 202 (5th Cir.

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 05-40031
-2-
1997); FED. R. APP. P. 24(a)(5). However, Tercero-Aranda has not
demonstrated any nonfrivolous ground for appeal.
The district court denied permission to proceed IFP based on
its finding that the instant petition would be duplicative of
another pending petition. We agree. The instant petition is yet
another attempt by Tercero-Aranda to relitigate these same issues
relating to his 1993 deportation order, pending immigration
detainers, and a state conviction for burglary of a habitation.
Tercero-Aranda has failed to establish that he seeks to
present a nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Accordingly, his motion
for IFP is denied, and the appeal is dismissed as frivolous. See
Baugh, 117 F.3d at 202 n.24; 5TH CIR. R. 42.2. Tercero-Aranda’s
motion for leave to proceed on the original record pursuant to
FED. R. APP. P. 24(c) is denied as moot.
MOTION FOR IFP DENIED; MOTION FOR LEAVE TO PROCEED ON
ORIGINAL RECORD DENIED; APPEAL DISMISSED AS FRIVOLOUS.

-- 2 of 2 --