Hines v. State of Minnesota
- John Tunheim
- 0:23-cv-00604
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 3
In Hines v. State of Minnesota, Judge Tunheim denied Frederick Hines’s request to appeal without paying fees because the appeal lacked a legal or factual basis.
Frederick Dewayne Hines was denied permission to proceed without paying the fee for his appeal. The underlying action had already been dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute.
What happened
In Hines v. State of Minnesota, Frederick Dewayne Hines, representing himself, asked to appeal without paying the filing fee. The court had previously denied his request to proceed without fees because he had three prior qualifying dismissals and had not shown an immediate danger of serious physical injury. After Hines did not pay the filing fee, the court dismissed the action without prejudice for failure to prosecute.
Hines appealed and asked to proceed without paying the appeal fee. The court explained that this status can be denied when an appeal is not brought in good faith, including when it has no reasonable legal or factual basis. The court concluded that Hines’s past-harm allegations did not meet the exception to the three-strikes rule and that his appeal was frivolous because he could not overcome that rule and had not paid the filing fee.
Judge John R. Tunheim denied Hines’s application to proceed without paying the fee on appeal.
The detailed version
- Hines v. State of Minnesota · No. 0:23-cv-00604
- John Tunheim
- May 1, 2024
Background
Frederick Dewayne Hines, representing himself, previously asked to proceed without paying filing fees. The court denied that request because it found that Hines had accrued three qualifying dismissals under the federal three-strikes rule and had not alleged an immediate danger of serious physical injury. After Hines did not timely pay the $402 filing fee, the court dismissed the action without prejudice for failure to prosecute.
Hines filed a notice of appeal and asked to proceed without paying the fee for the appeal.
Legal standard
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915, a person who cannot afford the full filing fee may request permission to proceed without paying it. Even if the person cannot afford the fee, the court must deny that status if the appeal is not taken in good faith. The court applies an objective standard and considers whether the appeal is legally or factually frivolous—meaning that it has no arguable basis in law or fact.
Court’s reasoning
The court reiterated that Hines’s allegations of past harm did not satisfy the immediate-danger exception to the three-strikes rule. Because Hines could not overcome the three-strikes rule and had not paid the filing fee, the court found that his appeal of the dismissal for failure to prosecute was frivolous.
Disposition
Judge John R. Tunheim denied Hines’s Application to Proceed Without Paying the Fee on Appeal, listed as Docket No. 26.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.