The opinion
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, SOUTHERN DIVISION
MICHAEL JEROME HOLLOWAY, )
)
Petitioner, )
) CIVIL ACTION NO.
v. ) 1:21cv605-MHT
) (WO)
SID LOCKHART, et al., )
)
Respondents. )
ORDER
This cause is now before the court on the
petitioner's notice of appeal (Doc. 42), which the court
is treating as a motion to proceed on appeal in forma
pauperis.
28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) provides that "[a]n 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 the
petitioner'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).
***
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the petitioner'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)(3), as not taken in good faith.
DONE, this the 17th day of November, 2023.
/s/ Myron H. Thompson
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
2