Whether a court of appeals may dismiss as "frivolous" a § 1983 plea-breach claim supported by recorded evidence and governed by Santobello v. New York, where:

(a) Petitioner presented recorded admissions from his own defense counsel confirming that the prosecutor knew the guilty plea was induced by custody promises, that those promises were never reduced to writing, and that the breach constituted grounds for a "viable motion to withdraw [the] plea" (see Appendix D at 4-5; Appendix E at 2-4);

(b) No respondent filed any responsive pleading at any stage of the proceedings —district court or appellate —yet both courts dismissed sua sponte without examining any evidence;

(c) The panel's three-sentence order cited no case law, addressed no argument from Petitioner's briefs, and did not mention Santobello or any other authority (see Appendix A); and

(d) The same panel then ordered that "no further filings will be entertained," effectively foreclosing Petitioner's right to seek rehearing under FRAP 40(a)(1) and en banc review under FRAP 35(a), and access to this Court under 28 U.S.C. § 1254(1).

Whether a court of appeals may dismiss as 'frivolous' a § 1983 plea-breach claim supported by recorded evidence and governed by Santobello v. New York