Lara v. People of the United States

Filing 4

ORDER Of Dismissal. The action is dismissed without prejudice. Leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal is denied without prejudice. Any pending motions are denied as moot. By Judge Lewis T. Babcock on 6/20/2014. (klyon, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Civil Action No. 14-cv-01295-BNB
RAYMOND LARA,
Applicant,
v.
PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES,
Respondent.

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Applicant, Raymond Lara, is a state prisoner at the Limon Correctional Facility in
Limon, Colorado. On May 6, 2014, Applicant submitted pro se a document (ECF No. 1)
requesting that the Court toll the one-year limitation period for filing his 28 U.S.C. §
2254 action. The request was denied without prejudice, but the instant action was
commenced because it appeared that Applicant intended to seek federal habeas corpus
relief.
On May 8, 2014, Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland reviewed the document and
determined that it was deficient. Judge Boland entered an order directing Applicant to
cure certain enumerated deficiencies within thirty days; directing Applicant to submit on
the Court-approved form an Application for Writ of Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 2254; and informing Applicant that the only proper Respondent in a habeas
corpus action is his current warden, superintendent, jailer, or other custodian. Judge
Boland also directed Applicant to obtain a Prisoner’s Motion and Affidavit for Leave to

Proceed Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 in a Habeas Corpus Action and explained that
Applicant could pay the $5.00 filing fee instead of submitting the § 1915 documentation.
Applicant has failed within the time allowed to submit an Application for Writ of
Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 and a Prisoner’s Motion and Affidavit for
Leave to Proceed Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 in a Habeas Corpus Action on the
proper, Court-approved forms. Accordingly, Applicant has failed to cure all of the
deficiencies in this case, or otherwise communicate with the Court in any way.
Therefore, the action will be dismissed without prejudice for Applicant’s failure to cure
the designated deficiencies within the time allowed and for failure to prosecute.
Finally, the Court certifies pursuant to § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this
order would not be taken in good faith and therefore in forma pauperis status will be
denied for the purpose of appeal. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438
(1962). If Applicant files a notice of appeal he also must pay the full $505.00 appellate
filing fee or file a motion to proceed in forma pauperis in the United States Court of
Appeals for the Tenth Circuit within thirty days in accordance with Fed. R. App. P. 24.
Accordingly, it is
ORDERED that the action is dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(b)
of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for the failure of Applicant, Raymond Lara, to
cure the deficiencies designated in the order to cure of May 8, 2014, within the time
allowed. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal is
denied without prejudice to the filing of a motion seeking leave to proceed in forma
pauperis on appeal in the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. It is
2

FURTHER ORDERED that any pending motions are denied as moot.
DATED June 20, 2014, at Denver, Colorado.
BY THE COURT:

s/Lewis T. Babcock
LEWIS T. BABCOCK
Senior Judge, United States District Court

3