Boswell v. Amerson

Filing 6

MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge L Scott Coogler on 9/24/2015. (PSM)

Download PDF
FILED 2015 Sep-24 PM 02:45 U.S. DISTRICT COURT N.D. OF ALABAMA IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA EASTERN DIVISION SKYLAR MILES BOSWELL, ) ) ) ) ) Case Number: 1:15-cv-01187-LSC-JHE ) ) ) ) Petitioner, v. SHERIFF LARRY AMERSON, Respondent. MEMORANDUM OPINION On July 15, 2015, Petitioner Skylar Miles Boswell (“Boswell”) filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus. (Doc. 1). Along with his petition, he included a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, including a note stating that the bookkeeper had refused to complete his account statement form. (Doc. 2). The magistrate judge instructed him to file, within thirty days, a new application to proceed in forma pauperis including either a certified copy of his prison account statements or an affidavit under oath stating who he had requested the statement from, when he had requested it, and what their response was. (Doc. 3). Boswell was also advised that his filed petition was missing pages four through nine and did not include any claims; therefore, he was instructed to file an amended petition. (Id.). On August 13, 2015, Boswell filed a new motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and included the certified account statement. (Doc. 4). The magistrate judge denied that motion because the prison account statement showed monthly deposits averaging just over $40. (Doc. 5). More than thirty days has passed since either of those orders, and Boswell has not paid the filing fee or otherwise prosecuted this action. DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Accordingly, Boswell’s petition is due to be A separate order will be entered. 1 DONE and ORDERED on September 24, 2015. _____________________________ L. Scott Coogler United States District Judge 160704 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?