Bolden v. U.S., CR16-2015-LRR16-CV-2015-LRR. (2016)
Court: District Court, N.D. Iowa
Number: infdco20160304997
Visitors: 6
Filed: Mar. 03, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2016
Summary: ORDER LINDA R. READE , District Judge . This matter appears before the court on the petitioner's application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2241 (docket no. 1). The clerk's office filed such application on February 19, 2016. The petitioner did not submit the required filing fee or an application to proceed in forma pauperis. See 28 U.S.C. 1914(a) (requiring $400.00 filing fee for civil actions, except that on application for a writ of habeas corpus the filing fee is
Summary: ORDER LINDA R. READE , District Judge . This matter appears before the court on the petitioner's application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2241 (docket no. 1). The clerk's office filed such application on February 19, 2016. The petitioner did not submit the required filing fee or an application to proceed in forma pauperis. See 28 U.S.C. 1914(a) (requiring $400.00 filing fee for civil actions, except that on application for a writ of habeas corpus the filing fee is ..
More
ORDER
LINDA R. READE, District Judge.
This matter appears before the court on the petitioner's application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (docket no. 1). The clerk's office filed such application on February 19, 2016. The petitioner did not submit the required filing fee or an application to proceed in forma pauperis. See 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a) (requiring $400.00 filing fee for civil actions, except that on application for a writ of habeas corpus the filing fee is $5.00); 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (explaining in forma pauperis proceedings). Thus, he did not properly commence this action. Further, the court previously explained to the petitioner that he needed to exhaust his administrative remedies within the Federal Bureau of Prisons1 and, if necessary, then file a habeas corpus petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 in the district where he is confined, which is the Middle District of Florida, not the Northern District of Iowa. Accordingly, the petitioner's application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (docket no. 1) is dismissed without prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
FootNotes
1. The court notes that the petitioner states that he did not exhaust his administrative remedies based on an assertion made by a docketing clerk within the clerk's office. But, the petitioner wrongly identified himself when he spelled his name "Louis Boldon" or "Louis L. Boldon" and, consequently, his case could not be found. And, in the instant case, the petitioner again signed his pleading by using "Louis Boldon."
Source: Leagle
