Kelley v. CDCR ESP/SAC et al
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 6/21/2017 DISMISSING petitioner's application for writ of habeas corpus with leave to amend within 30 days. Within 30 days, petitioner must submit an application to proceed ifp or the appropriate filing fee. Petitioner's 14 motion for appointment of counsel is DENIED. The Clerk shall send petitioner forms for application for writ of habeas corpus and ifp.(Yin, K)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
PATRICK D. KELLEY, JR.,
No. 2:17-cv-0111 AC P
CDCR CSP/SAC, et al.,
Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner also seeks appointment of counsel.
Although petitioner has filed a copy of his prison trust account statement (ECF No. 8), he
has failed to file an application to proceed in forma pauperis, despite being ordered to do so prior
to the transfer of his petition to this district (ECF No. 10). Accordingly, petitioner will be
required to complete and return an application to proceed in forma pauperis or pay the $5.00
In addition to requiring petitioner to submit an application to proceed in forma pauperis or
to pay the filing fee, the court will dismiss the petition with leave to amend. Petitioner challenges
a rules violation report that he was issued. ECF No. 1. However, while the petition indicates that
he is serving a determinate sentence, it is not clear from the petition that he lost any time credits
or that he exhausted his state court remedies. Id. In fact, it appears that at the time of filing the
petition, petitioner had yet to have a hearing on rules violation report. Id. at 7. In amending the
petition, petitioner must include information regarding the exhaustion of his state court remedies
and whether he lost time credits. Petitioner is advised that in order for the court to have habeas
jurisdiction over his claim, success on the petition must necessarily result in petitioner’s speedier
release. Nettles v. Grounds, 830 F.3d 922, 934-35 (9th Cir. 2016) (en banc).
Finally, with respect to petitioner’s request for counsel, there currently exists no absolute
right to appointment of counsel in habeas proceedings. Nevius v. Sumner, 105 F.3d 453, 460 (9th
Cir. 1996). However, 18 U.S.C. § 3006A authorizes the appointment of counsel for financially
eligible petitioners at any stage of the case “if the interests of justice so require.” Petitioner’s
request will be denied at this time because he has not yet established financial eligibility and
because the petition is being dismissed with leave to amend, the court is unable to determine
whether petitioner has any claims such that the interests of justice would require appointment of
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Petitioner’s application for writ of habeas corpus is dismissed with leave to amend
within thirty days of service of this order. Any amended petition must bear the case number
assigned to this action and the title “Amended Petition.”
2. Within thirty days of service of this order, petitioner must submit an application in
support of his request to proceed in forma pauperis or the appropriate filing fee. Petitioner’s
failure to comply with this order will result in dismissal of this action.
3. Petitioner’s motion for appointment of counsel (ECF No. 14) is denied.
4. The Clerk of the Court is directed to send petitioner the court’s form for application for
writ of habeas corpus and a copy of the in forma pauperis form used by this district.
DATED: June 21, 2017
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?