Pulley v. Paramo et al

Filing 60

ORDER Granting Petitioner's 58 Motion to Proceed in Forma Pauperis on Appeal. It is ordered that the Court concludes that petitioner's application demonstrates he is unable to pay the requisite fees and costs on appeal. Accordingly, the Court grants petitioner's motion to proceed IFP on appeal. Signed by Judge Janis L. Sammartino on 5/22/2017. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(dxj)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ROBERT G. PULLEY, Case No.: 14-CV-2034 JLS (MDD) Petitioner, 12 13 14 ORDER GRANTING PETITIONER’S MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS ON APPEAL v. D. PARAMO, Warden, et al., Respondents. 15 (ECF No. 58) 16 17 Presently before the Court is Petitioner Robert G. Pulley’s Motion for Leave to 18 Proceed In Forma Pauperis (“IFP”) on Appeal. (ECF No. 58.) Federal Rule of Appellate 19 Procedure 24(a)(1)1 allows a plaintiff to move for IFP status on appeal so long as the 20 plaintiff attaches an affidavit of his inability to pay, claims an entitlement to redress, and 21 states the issues he intends to present on appeal. The determination of whether a plaintiff 22 is indigent, and thus unable to pay the filing fee, falls within the district court’s discretion. 23 Cal. Men’s Colony v. Rowland, 939 F.2d 854, 858 (9th Cir. 1991), reversed on other 24 grounds, 506 U.S. 194 (1993) (“Section 1915 typically requires the reviewing court to 25 /// 26 27 28 1 Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 24(a)(3), which provides that a party who has already been granted IFP status may file an appeal as such without further authorization, is inapplicable because Petitioner paid the requisite filing fee and the Court thus denied as moot his motion to proceed IFP. (See ECF No. 18.) 1 14-CV-2034 JLS (MDD) 1 exercise its sound discretion in determining whether the affiant has satisfied the statute’s 2 requirement of indigency.”). 3 In the present case, Petitioner has submitted an affidavit demonstrating that he has 4 roughly $2.00 in his account, and that his average monthly balance in the past six months 5 was $2.78. (ECF No. 57-1, at 4.) Additionally, the average monthly deposits to his account 6 over that same period was $28.42. (Id.) And Petitioner specifically appeals the Court’s 7 denial of his Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. (See ECF Nos. 54, 56, 57.) Given the 8 foregoing, the Court concludes that Petitioner’s application demonstrates he is unable to 9 pay the requisite fees and costs on appeal. Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Petitioner’s 10 11 12 Motion to Proceed IFP on Appeal (ECF No. 58). IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: May 22, 2017 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 14-CV-2034 JLS (MDD)

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?