From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gagle v. Veal

United States District Court, E.D. California
Sep 5, 2006
No. CIV S-06-0575-FCD-CMK-P (E.D. Cal. Sep. 5, 2006)

Opinion

No. CIV S-06-0575-FCD-CMK-P.

September 5, 2006


ORDER


Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On April 6, 2006, the court directed petitioner to either submit an affidavit in support of his application to proceed in forma pauperis or pay the filing fee for this action within 30 days. Petitioner failed to comply and, on May 23, 2006, the court issued findings and recommendations that this action be dismissed for lack of prosecution and failure to comply with court rules and orders. See Local Rule 11-110. On June 5, 2006, petitioner filed two documents (Docs. 6 7) essentially requesting additional time to comply with the court's April 6, 2006, order regarding fees. On June 8, 2006, the court issued an order vacating the May 23, 2006, findings and recommendations and providing petitioner another opportunity to resolve the fees status for this case.

Petitioner did not comply and, on August 17, 2006, the court again issued findings and recommendations that this action be dismissed. On August 30, 2006, petitioner filed objections to the findings and recommendations, reciting difficulties he is having getting documents back from prison officials. In the interest of justice and in order to provide petitioner every opportunity to proceed with this claims on the merits, the court will again vacate the findings and recommendations and provide petitioner another chance to resolve fee status.

A review of the record continues to reflect that petitioner has not filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis or paid the required filing fee. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914(a), 1915(a). To be complete, an application to proceed in forma pauperis must be completed by petitioner in that all questions have been answered, and must be accompanied by a ". . . certification from the warden or other appropriate officer of the place of confinement showing the amount of money or securities that the petitioner has in any account in the institution." In this case, the court has received a certified copy of petitioner's prison trust account statement (Doc. 6). Therefore, in order to present a completed application petitioner need only return the form application with all question answered. Petitioner must also sign the application. Because neither of these actions requires participation from prison officials, the court will not entertain any further pleas from petitioner as to delays allegedly caused by prison officials.

Petitioner is again warned that failure to comply with this order may result in the dismissal of this action. See Local Rule 11-110.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The findings and recommendations issued on August 17, 2006 (Doc. 9), are vacated;

2. Petitioner shall submit on the form provided by the Clerk of the Court, within 30 days from the date of this order, a complete application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, or the appropriate filing fee; and

3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to send petitioner a new form Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis By a Prisoner.


Summaries of

Gagle v. Veal

United States District Court, E.D. California
Sep 5, 2006
No. CIV S-06-0575-FCD-CMK-P (E.D. Cal. Sep. 5, 2006)
Case details for

Gagle v. Veal

Case Details

Full title:NATHAN CAGLE, Petitioner, v. VEAL, Respondent

Court:United States District Court, E.D. California

Date published: Sep 5, 2006

Citations

No. CIV S-06-0575-FCD-CMK-P (E.D. Cal. Sep. 5, 2006)