Martin v. United States of America

Filing 27

ORDER denying 23 Motion for Leave to Appeal in forma pauperis. The Court can certify that this appeal is not being taken in good faith where Martin has not made a substaintial showing of the denial of a constitutional right and one of his claims is procedurally defaulted. Entered by Judge Michael M. Mihm on 11/23/10. cc: petitioner.(FDT, ilcd)

Download PDF
Martin v. United States of America Doc. 27 Tuesday, 23 November, 2010 12:19:36 PM Clerk, U.S. District Court, ILCD UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS E-FILED GEORGE MARTIN, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ORDER Case No. 09-1387 Now before the Court is Petitioner George Martin's ("Martin") Motion for Leave to Appeal In Forma Pauperis. For the reasons set forth below, Martin's Motion [#23] is DENIED. Title 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) provides that "[a]n appeal may not be taken in forma pauperis if the trial court certifies in writing that it is not taken in good faith." The Seventh Circuit has clarified that bad faith is essentially equivalent to a finding of frivolousness. See Lee v. Clinton, 209 F.3d 1025, 1026 (7th Cir. 2000). "[T]o sue in bad faith means merely to sue on the basis of a frivolous claim, which is to say a claim that no reasonable person could suppose to have any merit." Id. Under this formulation of the standard, the Court can certify that this appeal is not being taken in good faith where Martin has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right and one of his claims is procedurally defaulted. His Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis on Appeal [#23] is therefore DENIED. ENTERED this 23rd day of November, 2010. s/ Michael M. Mihm Michael M. Mihm United States District Judge 1 Dockets.Justia.com

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?