In re: Jerome Talley

Filing 18

ORDER on 17 Motion for Reconsideration signed by Judge Ricardo S Martinez. Respondent's request for reconsideration of the Court's previous order is DENIED.**2 PAGE(S), PRINT ALL**(ST)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 7 8 In re: JEROME TALLEY, 9 Respondent. CASE NO. MC15-164MJP ORDER ON MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION 10 11 Respondent previously filed a proposed “Petition Under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for Writ of 12 Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody.” Dkt. #14. After reviewing the pleading in light of 13 the Bar Order under which Respondent is currently operating (Dkt. #3) and under 28 U.S.C. § 14 1915(g), this Court declined to file the pleading and barred Respondent from proceeding. The 15 rationale was simple: both under the Bar Order and § 1915(g), Respondent must file an affidavit 16 declaring under penalty of perjury that he is in “imminent danger of serious bodily injury or death.” 17 His pleading contained no such declaration. Dkt #15 at 2. 18 19 20 21 22 Respondent has now filed a Motion for Reconsideration of that order. Dkt. #17. Local Rule 7(h) governs such motions: Motions for reconsideration are disfavored. The court will ordinarily deny such motions in the absence of a showing of manifest error in the prior ruling or a showing of new facts or legal authority which could not have been brought to its attention earlier with reasonable diligence. 23 24 ORDER ON MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION - 1 1 Respondent’s motion does not satisfy this standard. He alleges no manifest error in the 2 Court’s prior ruling, nor does he present new facts or legal authority which he claims could not 3 have been brought to the Court’s attention earlier. While he does include within the motion for 4 reconsideration an allegation that “he is in imminent danger of serious physical bodily injury or 5 his death if he is not transferred from the Washington State Department of Corrections” (Dkt #17 6 at 3), it is an empty recitation devoid of any supporting factual evidence. Nor is there any showing 7 of why he could not have come forth with such an allegation (along with corroborating evidence) 8 when he first filed his motion. Accordingly, Respondent’s request for reconsideration of the Court’s previous order is 9 10 DENIED. The Clerk is ordered to provide copies of this order to Respondent and to all counsel of 11 12 record. Dated: June 28, 2017. 13 A 14 15 RICARDO S. MARTINEZ CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 -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?