Carrillo v. Placer County Superior Court
Filing
11
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 8/31/15 ORDERING that this action is DISMISSED and the court declines to issue a certificate of appealability. CASE CLOSED. (Dillon, M)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
RAY CARRILLO,
12
13
14
No. 2:15-cv-1461-EFB P
Petitioner,
v.
ORDER
PLACER COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT,
15
Respondent.
16
17
Petitioner is a state prisoner without counsel seeking a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to
18
28 U.S.C. § 2254. This proceeding was referred to this court by Local Rule 302 pursuant to 28
19
U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and is before the undersigned pursuant to petitioner’s consent. See 28 U.S.C.
20
§ 636; see also E.D. Cal. Local Rules, Appx. A, at (k)(4).
21
On July 15, 2015, the court reviewed the petition pursuant to Rule 4 of the Rules
22
Governing Section 2254 Cases. The court found that petitioner had not properly completed the
23
form petition by responding to the questions raised therein. As drafted, the court was unable to
24
determine the nature of petitioner’s intended grounds for relief or discharge its duty under Rule 4.
25
ECF No. 10. The order granted petitioner thirty days in which to file an amended petition and
26
warned him that failure to comply would result in this action being dismissed. The time for
27
acting has passed and petitioner has not filed an amended petition, or otherwise responded to the
28
court’s order.
1
1
A party’s failure to comply with any order or with the Local Rules “may be grounds for
2
imposition by the Court of any and all sanctions authorized by statute or Rule or within the
3
inherent power of the Court.” E.D. Cal. Local Rule 110. The court may dismiss an action with or
4
without prejudice, as appropriate, if a party disobeys an order or the Local Rules. See Ferdik v.
5
Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1263 (9th Cir. 1992) (district court did not abuse discretion in
6
dismissing pro se plaintiff’s complaint for failing to obey an order to re-file an amended
7
complaint to comply with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure); Carey v. King, 856 F.2d 1439,
8
1440-41 (9th Cir. 1988) (dismissal for pro se plaintiff’s failure to comply with local rule
9
regarding notice of change of address affirmed).
10
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED and the court
11
declines to issue a certificate of appealability.
12
Dated: August 31, 2015.
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
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?