Chism v. Scribner

Filing 74

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 9/9/2010 DENYING, w/out prejudice, ptnr's 72 motion to proceed IFP on appeal. (cc: Ninth Circuit) (Yin, K)

(HC) Chism v. Scribner

Doc. 74

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Although the notice of appeal is filed in pro per, counsel has not sought to withdraw in compliance with Local Rule 182(d). 1
Dockets.Justia.com
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA BRANDON CHISM, Petitioner, vs. D. ADAMS, Respondent. / Petitioner, a state prison inmate proceeding with counsel1 with a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, has timely filed a notice of appeal from the judgment dated August 6, 2010, denying his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. He has also filed a motion to proceed in forma pauperis. ///// ///// ///// ///// ORDER No. CIV S-03-1793 MCE KJM P

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
2 chis1793.24

Rule 24(a) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure provides that a party to a district court action who desires to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal must file a motion in the district court which: (A) shows in the detail prescribed by Form 4 of the Appendix of Forms the party's inability to pay or to give security for fees and costs; (B) claims an entitlement to redress; and (C) states the issues that the party intends to present on appeal. Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(1). Petitioner has demonstrated his inability to pay but has not otherwise complied with the rule. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that petitioner's motion to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal (docket no. 72) is denied without prejudice. DATED: September 9, 2010.

2