Hughey v. Kernan
Filing
19
ORDER - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiffs request to remove the $350 filing fee and $10,000 restitution fine from his prison trust account is denied. This case remains closed. Signed by District Judge William Q. Hayes on 5/9/2022.(All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(ave)
Case 3:18-cv-00313-WQH-BGS Document 19 Filed 05/09/22 PageID.185 Page 1 of 2
1
2
3
4
5
6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9
10
FREDDIE HUGHEY,
CDCR #E-95781,
Case No.: 18-cv-313-WQH-BGS
ORDER
Plaintiff,
11
vs.
12
13
14
SCOTT KERNAN, Secretary at CDCR,
Defendant.
15
16
HAYES, Judge:
17
On April 15, 2022, Plaintiff Freddie Hughey, proceeding pro se and incarcerated at
18
Richard J. Donovan Correctional Facility in San Diego, California, filed a letter requesting
19
that the Court “remove” from his prison trust account the $350 filing fee related to the
20
above-captioned action and a $10,000 restitution fine imposed by a California state court.
21
(ECF No. 17 at 2). As the Court explained in the May 21, 2018 Order granting Plaintiff’s
22
Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis, the $350 filing fee required by 28 U.S.C. § 1914 is
23
required to be paid pursuant to the payment provisions set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1).
24
(ECF No. 4 at 2-3). Section 1915(b) does not grant a court discretion to “remove” the filing
25
fee from a prison trust account. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1) (“[I]f a prisoner brings a civil
26
action or files an appeal in forma pauperis, the prisoner shall be required to pay the full
27
amount of a filing fee.”) (emphasis added); see also Taylor v. Delatoore, 281 F.3d 844,
28
851 (9th Cir. 2002) (holding that § 1915(b) is constitutional).
1
18-cv-313-WQH-BGS
Case 3:18-cv-00313-WQH-BGS Document 19 Filed 05/09/22 PageID.186 Page 2 of 2
1
Similarly, this Court has no authority to “remove” the $10,000 restitution fine
2
imposed by the California state court. In his Complaint filed in this Court, Plaintiff claimed
3
that he was entitled to early parole consideration and did not seek any relief related to the
4
$10,000 restitution fine. On March 5, 2019, Judgment was entered in favor of Defendant
5
in this case and, accordingly, the time for Plaintiff to amend his pleadings to add a claim
6
related to the restitution fine has expired. If Plaintiff wishes to challenge or otherwise
7
“remove” the fine, he must file a new action in the appropriate court.
8
9
10
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s request to remove the $350 filing fee and
$10,000 restitution fine from his prison trust account is denied. This case remains closed.
Dated: May 9, 2022
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
18-cv-313-WQH-BGS
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?