BERGER v. ADAMS (2019)

Jerrell Berger, a Georgia state prisoner proceeding pro se, appeals the district court’s dismissal, without prejudice, of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas corpus petition for his failure to comply with a court order. He argues the merits of his habeas petition, contending that he received ineffective assistance of counsel.

We generally review de novo a district court’s dismissal of a § 2254 petition. Clark v. Crosby, 335 F.3d 1303, 1307 (11th Cir. 2003). However, where a district court dismisses an action for failure to comply with court rules, we review for abuse of discretion. Betty K Agencies, Ltd. v. M/V MONADA, 432 F.3d 1333, 1337 (11th Cir. 2005). While we construe briefs filed by pro se litigants liberally, “issues not briefed on appeal by a pro se litigant are deemed abandoned.” Timson v. Sampson, 518 F.3d 870, 874 (11th Cir. 2008) (per curiam).

Here, because Berger failed to address the dismissal of his case—the only appealable issue—he has abandoned any argument regarding the dismissal, and thus, we affirm.

AFFIRMED.

PER CURIAM: