Mitchell Stevens v. Darrel Vannoy, Warden, et al.
(1) whethoR the CouRt of Appeals RExedeRed A decision which conFlicts with this couRt 2nd decisioxs
OF It's own CoaRt, whon It Ruld thAt 2 dismiss Al
IS NOT A NON FRiViOUS ISSUE FOK APPeAL
(2) WhOthOR thE COURT OF DPPeZLS OEPARtEd FAR FRON
the Acceptable sNd usual Judicisl PRoceodinGbr
NOT FOllOWiNG the PROPOR STANdARd OF REVieW FOR diS.
MiSSAI OF 2 PRD SE FORMA PAUPAUS COMPIAINT
AS FRiViOUS
(3) whethiR the count of Appeals
SAnctioNod such
dePARtURE bY dOPtiNG ANd AFFiRMiNG the distRiCt
COURT RUliNG bEFORE PROPERlY RESOLOiNG All diSpatOS
FACTS ANd LAWS (ESPECiBllY thO AUThORiFY of the
deFendants (whene did ther get thien Authorizatiord
Whether the petitioner's free exercise rights were violated when prison officials refused to accommodate his religious dietary requirements