WALLACE v. STATE OF NEW JERSEY
OPINION. Signed by Judge Noel L. Hillman on 2/14/2017. (rtm, )
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
STATE OF NEW JERSEY,
Civil Action No. 17-616 (NLH)
P.O. Box 861
Trenton, NJ 08625
Petitioner Pro se
HILLMAN, District Judge
Pro Se Petitioner Jamie Wallace files this writ of habeas
corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, which appears to challenge an
unidentified New Jersey state court conviction.
The Petition is
deficient for the following reasons.
Local Civil Rule 81.2 provides:
Unless prepared by counsel, petitions to this
Court for a writ of habeas corpus . . . shall
be in writing (legibly handwritten in ink or
typewritten), signed by the petitioner or
movant, on forms supplied by the Clerk.
L. CIV. R. 81.2(a).
Petitioner did not use the habeas form
supplied by the Clerk for section 2254 petitions, i.e., AO 241
Section 2254 Rules
Pursuant to Rule 2 of the Rules Governing Section 2254
Cases in the United States District Courts, the petition must:
“(1) specify all the grounds for relief available to the
petitioner; (2) state the facts supporting each ground; (3)
state the relief requested;….”
Petitioner has not stated his
grounds for relief and supporting facts or even identified the
conviction he is challenging.
Petitioner neither prepaid the $5.00 filing fee for a
habeas petition as required by Local Civil Rule 54.3(a), nor did
he submit an application to proceed in forma pauperis.
For the reasons stated above, the Court will
administratively terminate this matter.
If Petitioner wishes to
reopen this case, within 30 days, he must submit a complete,
signed habeas petition on the correct form which names the
proper respondent and identifies his grounds for relief and the
He must also submit either the $5 filing fee
or a complete in forma pauperis application.
Dated: February 14, 2017
At Camden, New Jersey
s/ Noel L. Hillman
NOEL L. HILLMAN, U.S.D.J.
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?