Erwin Eugene Semien, proceeding pro se, appealed the dismissal of his civil rights complaint filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. Semien sued Jennifer L. Bergman, the Liberty County District Attorney, in both her official and individual capacities, along with the City of Liberty, Liberty County, and the Liberty Police Department. His complaint alleged various violations, including claims against the police department, state law causes of action for negligence and intentional infliction of emotional distress, and a request to compel a criminal prosecution against a private citizen. The district court dismissed the complaint, and Semien appealed, arguing that he had adequately stated claims for constitutional violations.
The Fifth Circuit, in a per curiam opinion, addressed the scope of Semien's appeal and the merits of his remaining constitutional claims. First, the court held that Semien had abandoned three specific categories of claims: those against the Liberty Police Department, his state law claims for negligence and intentional infliction of emotional distress, and his claim seeking to compel a criminal prosecution against a private citizen. The court limited its review to the contents of the original complaint, refusing to consider new facts alleged in Semien's appellate briefs. Regarding the due process claim, the court found Semien unpersuasive in his contention that he adequately alleged a protected property interest. Citing Town of Castle Rock v. Gonzales, the court explained that without a protected property interest, a conspiracy to deny due process cannot be sustained. Similarly, the court rejected the equal protection claim, noting that the complaint failed to allege any specific comparator. Under Fifth Circuit precedent, specifically Rountree v. Dyson, a plaintiff must identify specific comparators to state a claim for conspiracy to deny equal protection. Because Semien did not adequately allege the violation of a constitutional right on these remaining grounds, the court found his contentions without merit.
The judgment of the district court denying relief is upheld, and Semien's appeal is dismissed. This decision reinforces the requirement in the Fifth Circuit that plaintiffs must identify specific comparators to survive dismissal on equal protection grounds and must allege a protected property interest to state a due process claim involving a conspiracy. It also clarifies that failure to pursue specific claims in an appellate brief constitutes abandonment of those claims.