180 F.3d 262
5th Cir.
1999

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus FLOYD COLEMAN, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 97-20559

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

April 19, 1999

Conference Calendar
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. H-90-CR-303-2

Before JONES, SMITH, and DUHÉ, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Floyd Coleman, federal prisoner #54809-079, appeals the district court‘s denial of his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) motion to modify sentence. Although we apply less stringent standards to parties proceeding pro se than to parties represented by counsel and liberally construe the briefs of pro se litigants, pro se parties must still brief the issues and reasonably comply with the requirements of Fed. R. App. P. 28. Grant v. Cuellar, 59 F.3d 523, 524 (5th Cir. 1995). Because Coleman does not address the district court‘s dismissal of his § 3582(c) motion, he has abandoned the only issue on appeal. See Brinkmann v. Dallas County Deputy Sheriff Abner, 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987); see Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 225 (5th Cir. 1993).

Coleman‘s appeal is without arguable merit and is frivolous. See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983). Because the appeal is frivolous, it is dismissed. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2. We caution Coleman that any additional frivolous appeals filed by him or on his behalf will invite the imposition of sanctions. To avoid sanctions, Coleman should review any pending appeals to ensure that they do not raise arguments that are frivolous.

APPEAL DISMISSED AS FRIVOLOUS; SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.

Notes

*
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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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.