Hampton v. Superior Court of San Francisco et al
Filing
15
AMENDED ORDER OF DISMISSAL re 12 Order Dismissing Case, Terminate Motions,,. Signed by Judge Charles R. Breyer on 4/7/2014. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(tlS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/8/2014)
1
2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
3
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
4
5
ROBIN S. HAMPTON, E-97187,
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
)
)
Petitioner,
)
)
v.
)
)
R. T. C. GROUNDS, Warden,
)
)
Respondent.
)
______________________________ )
No. C 14-0344 CRB (PR)
AMENDED ORDER OF
DISMISSAL
The order of dismissal filed on March 31, 2014 (docket #12) is vacated and
replaced with the following order:
On February 10, 2014, the court notified petitioner in writing that his action for a
14
new trial/petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 was deficient
15
because he did not pay the requisite $5.00 filing fee or, instead, submit a signed and
16
completed court-approved in forma pauperis application, including a completed
17
certificate of funds in the prisoner’s account and a copy of the prisoner’s trust account
18
statement for the last six months. Petitioner was advised that failure to file the requested
19
items within 28 days would result in dismissal of the action.
20
More than 40 days have elapsed; however, petitioner has not filed the requisite
21
items or sought an extension of time to do so. The action is DISMISSED without
22
prejudice to filing a new habeas action accompanied by the requisite $5.00 filing fee or a
23
signed and completed in forma pauperis application.
24
The clerk shall close the file and terminate all pending motions as moot.
25
SO ORDERED.
26
DATED: April 7, 2014
27
28
______________________
CHARLES R. BREYER
United States District Judge
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
27
28
N:\Hampton, R.14-0344.dsifp.wpd
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?