Tanksley v. Salinas Valley State Prison

Filing 4

ORDER DISMISSING CASE without prejudice for failure to pay the filing fee or submit a completed IFP application; Signed by Judge Marilyn Hall Patel on 3/3/2009. (Attachments: # 1 CertServ)(awb, COURT-STAFF) (Filed on 3/4/2009)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 MOODY TANKSLEY, 9 10 v. Petitioner, No. C 08-5402 MHP (pr) ORDER OF DISMISSAL UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA United United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 SALINAS VALLEY STATE PRISON, 12 Respondent. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 / This pro se habeas action was filed on December 2, 2008, at which time the court notified petitioner in writing that the action was deficient due to the failure to pay the filing fee or furnish a completed and signed court-approved in forma pauperis application specifically, that he had not included a trust account statement and signed certificate of funds for his prisoner's trust account statement. Petitioner was advised that failure to pay the fee or file the application materials within thirty days would result in dismissal of the action. Petitioner did not pay the filing fee or submit the materials needed to complete his in forma pauperis application. The action is DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to pay the filing fee or submit a completed in forma pauperis application. Petitioner may file a new action, but should include a filing fee or an in forma pauperis application with a new complaint to commence that new action. The petition is dismissed for the additional reason that it is incomprehensible. A claim that is incomprehensible may be dismissed as frivolous as it is without an arguable basis in law. See Jackson v. Arizona, 885 F.2d 639, 641 (9th Cir. 1989). To the extent the 1 petitioner wants to challenge a conviction or sentence from the Kern County Superior Court, 2 he must file his petition in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California in 3 Sacramento, because Kern County is in that district and is the proper venue for such a 4 challenge. See 28 U.S.C. 2241(d); N. D. Cal. Habeas Local Rule 2254-3(b). 5 6 The clerk shall close the file. IT IS SO ORDERED. _______________________ Marilyn Hall Patel United States District Judge 7 Dated: March 3, 2009 8 9 10 United States District Court 11 For the Northern District of California 12 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?