Kozic v. Sloan

Filing 8

Memorandum Opinion: Petitioner's application to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. No. 2 ) is granted. The petition for writ of habeas corpus (Doc. No. 1 , as amended by Doc. No. 7 ) is denied, and this action is dismissed without prejud ice pursuant to Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases. Further, the Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1915(a)(3), that an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith, and that there is no basis upon which to issue a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. Section 2253; Fed. R. App. P. 22(b). Judge Sara Lioi on 5/4/2016. (P,J)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION

ZOLTAN KOZIC,

PETITIONER,
vs.
BRIGHAM SLOAN,

RESPONDENT.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CASE NO. 4:16-cv-245

JUDGE SARA LIOI
MEMORANDUM OPINION

Pro se petitioner Zoltan Kozic filed the above-captioned petition for a writ of habeas
corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. He is currently incarcerated in the Lake Erie Correctional
Institution, having been convicted on September 1, 2011 of burglary, trafficking in drugs, and
engaging in a pattern of corrupt activity. He was sentenced to eighteen years in prison.
It was unclear from the petition what grounds for relief Kozic was asserting. He attached
as exhibits to his petition lists of assignments of error he had asserted in the state courts, relying
on the Court to search through those exhibits and piece together grounds for relief for this habeas
petition. On April 1, 2016, the Court informed Kozic that it was his responsibility to identify
grounds for the relief he seeks in his petition, particularly in this case, where Kozic asked this
Court to stay these proceedings while his petition for post-conviction relief is pending in the
Mahoning County Court of Common Pleas. The Court afforded Kozic until May 2, 2016 to file
an amended petition listing all the grounds he intends to pursue, or suffer dismissal of his
petition.

On April 29, 2016, Kozic filed an amended petition; however, it did not comply with the
Court’s order. The amended petition still does not identify any grounds for relief. In fact, it omits
all of the pages on the form petition where a petitioner would state the grounds for relief. The
Court cannot entertain a petition that does not contain grounds for relief.
For the foregoing reasons, Kozic’s application to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. No. 2)
is granted. The petition for writ of habeas corpus (Doc. No. 1, as amended by Doc. No. 7) is
denied, and this action is dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Rule 4 of the Rules Governing
Section 2254 Cases. Further, the Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that an
appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith, and that there is no basis upon which
to issue a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253; Fed. R. App. P. 22(b).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 4, 2016
HONORABLE SARA LIOI
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2