The opinion
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION
ANTUANE D. DANIEL, )
)
Plaintiff, )
) CIVIL ACTION NO.
v. ) 2:23cv618-MHT
) (WO)
ALABAMA CRIME VICTIMS )
COMPENSATION and DIR. )
EVERETTE, Ala. Crime )
Victims Attorney, )
)
Defendants. )
ORDER
This cause is now before the court on plaintiff's
notice of appeal (Doc. 27).
28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) provides that, “An appeal may
not be taken in forma pauperis if the trial court
certifies in writing that it is not taken in good
faith.” In making this determination as to good faith,
a court must use an objective standard, such as whether
the appeal is “frivolous,” Coppedge v. United States,
369 U.S. 438, 445 (1962), or “has no substantive
merit.” United States v. Bottoson, 644 F.2d 1174, 1176
(5th Cir. Unit B May 15, 1981) (per curiam); see also
Rudolph v. Allen, 666 F.2d 519, 520 (11th Cir. 1982)
(per curiam); Morris v. Ross, 663 F.2d 1032 (11th Cir.
1981). Applying this standard, this court is of the
opinion that, for the reasons stated in the report and
recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge
(Doc. 24), the plaintiff’s appeal is without a legal or
factual basis and, accordingly, is frivolous and not
taken in good faith. See, e.g., Rudolph v. Allen,
supra; Brown v. Pena, 441 F. Supp. 1382 (S.D. Fla.
1977), aff'd without opinion, 589 F.2d 1113 (5th Cir.
1979). As set forth in the recommendation, plaintiff
repeatedly failed comply with court orders after being
given ample opportunity to do so. He did not object to
the recommendation. Moreover, his notice of appeal was
2
filed well after the 30-day deadline without an
adequate excuse for his months-long delay.
***
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the plaintiff's
motion to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis is
denied; and that the appeal in this cause is certified,
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a), as not taken in good
faith.
DONE, this the 11th day of February, 2025.
/s/ Myron H. Thompson
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
3