Bogneas v. Samuels
Filing
4
ORDER - This action is dismissed as improperly commenced and frivolous. It is further ordered that a certificate of appealability is denied. The Clerk shall enter judgment accordingly and close this case. Signed by Judge Miranda M. Du on 10/13/2016. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DRM)
1
2
3
4
5
6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
8
***
9
PALLE BOGNEAS,
10
Case No. 3:16-cv-00314-MMD-VPC
Petitioner,
ORDER
v.
11
CHARLES E. SAMUELS, JR., et al.,
12
Respondents.
13
14
Petitioner has submitted a purported pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus
15
under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (ECF No. 1-1). The petition is not on the court-required form,
16
and petitioner has failed to submit an application to proceed in forma pauperis or pay
17
the filing fee. Accordingly, this matter has not been properly commenced. 28 U.S.C. §
18
1915(a)(2) and Local Rule LSR 3-1.
19
Moreover, while petitioner attaches a 1998 complaint against him for federal tax
20
evasion, he sets forth no discernible factual allegations cognizable in federal habeas
21
and no discernible, plausible factual allegations that would state a claim for which relief
22
may be granted in any event. Petitioner’s submissions are delusional and frivolous. The
23
present action, therefore, will be dismissed. Reasonable jurists would not find the
24
Court’s conclusions to be debatable or wrong, and the Court will not issue a certificate
25
of appealability.
26
27
28
It is therefore ordered that this action is dismissed as improperly commenced and
frivolous.
It is further ordered that a certificate of appealability is denied.
It is further ordered that the Clerk enter judgment accordingly and close this
1
2
3
case.
DATED THIS 13th day of October.
4
MIRANDA M. DU
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
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?