766 F.2d 179, 180-81 (5th Cir.1985), or a questionnaire, as suggested by the Fifth Circuit’s opinions in Macias v. Raul A., 23 F.3d 94, 97 (5th Cir.1994), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 883, 115 S.Ct. 220, 130 L.Ed.2d 147 (1994), and Parker v. Carpenter, 978 F.2d 190, 191 (5th Cir. 1992).' This Court’s questionnaire to plaintiff was designed to comply with the foregoing suggestions. Regardless of the procedure used, however, the court must ensure that the evidence it considers is authentic and reliable. See Wilson v. Barrientos, 926 F.2d at 483. A plaintiff's testimony at a Spears hearing and his answers to the court's questionnaire become a part of the total filing by the pro se plaintiff. See Eason v. Holt, 73 F.3d 600, 603 (5th Cir.1996). 97 . See Schultea v. Wood, 47 F.3d at 1434, (<HOLDING>); Gartrell v. Gaylor, 981 F.2d at 259; Ali v.
recognizing doctrine holding that defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity holding court lacked jurisdiction to hear interlocutory appeal of denial of motion to dismiss based on qualified immunity by defendants who were not public officials holding that the doctrine of legislative immunity is not uniquely asserted on motions to dismiss recognizing the authority of the district court to dismiss an action pursuant to  1915d based on the doctrine of qualified immunity