Tillman v. Board of Prison Terms

Filing 3

ORDER DISMISSING CASE. Signed by Judge William Alsup on 3/22/11. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service)(dt, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/23/2011)

Tillman v. Board of Prison Terms

Doc. 3

1 2 3 4 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 8 9 10 vs. BOARD OF PRISON TERMS, Respondent. /
For the Northern District of California

ANTHONY TILLMAN Petitioner,

No. C 11-1091 WHA (PR) ORDER OF DISMISSAL

United States District Court

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Dated: Mach 27 28 22

Petitioner, a California prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a habeas petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2254. He has used the court's form habeas petition, and his response to virtually every question on the form is "none" or "no recollection." He states that there was no state court conviction or sentence, that he is not now in custody serving a term on a state conviction, that he does not recollect anything about the charges or the conviction. He states he had no trial or appeal, and that he recollects nothing about the state post-conviction process. Most importantly, where he is required to identify the claims he is raising in the instant petition, he states "no recollection." It is noted that plaintiff filed two prior pro se habeas petitions in recent months, both of which were transferred to a different district because venue was not proper here. In the absence of any claims or any information about the conviction or other criminal proceedings being challenged in the instant petition, the petition does not state a cognizable claim and is DISMISSED. The Clerk shall enter judgment and close the file. IT IS SO ORDERED. , 2011.

WILLIAM ALSUP UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

G:\PRO-SE\WHA\HC.11\TILLMAN1091.DSM.wpd

Dockets.Justia.com