Lester L. JONES, Plaintiff-Appellant v. Gabriel WALKER; Jason Ellis; Dolan Waller; Christopher Epps, Defendants-Appellees, 251 F. App'x 900

PER CURIAM: Lester L. Jones, Mississippi prisoner # 49366, appeals from the dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Jones contends on appeal that he was deprived of access to a law library for a period beginning during his direct appeal process and ending after the expiration of the three-year period to seek state postconviction relief. He further argues that he was deprived again of the opportunity to seek postconviction relief when his legal materials at issue in his district court action were taken from him in 2003.

Jones did not raise in the district court his claim that he was deprived of access to a law library during the three-year period in which he could seek postconviction relief. As this claim was not raised below, it cannot be considered on appeal. See Leverette v. Louisville Ladder Co., 183 F.3d 339, 342 (5th Cir.1999). As to the legal materials taken from him in 2003, Jones has shown no relevant actual injury and has failed to state a nonfrivolous claim of a violation of his right of access to the courts. See Lewis v. Casey, 518 U.S. 343, 351, 116 S.Ct. 2174, 135 L.Ed.2d 606 (1996).

As this appeal lacks arguable merit, it is dismissed as frivolous. See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir.1983); 5th Cir. R. 42.2 The district court’s dismissal and the dismissal of Jones’s appeal count as two strikes for the purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). See Adepegba v. Hammons, 103 F.3d 383, 387 (5th Cir.1996). Jones is warned that if he accumulates three strikes pursuant to § 1915(g), he may not proceed in forma pauperis in any civil action or appeal filed while he is incarcerated or detained in any facility unless he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. See § 1915(g).

APPEAL DISMISSED; SANCTION WARNING ISSUED. Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.