Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Hartfield v. United States, 4:19-cv-00375 BSM/PSH. (2019)

Court: District Court, E.D. Arkansas Number: infdco20190807644 Visitors: 5
Filed: Jul. 18, 2019
Latest Update: Jul. 18, 2019
Summary: FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION PATRICIA S. HARRIS , Magistrate Judge . INSTRUCTIONS The following proposed Findings and Recommendation have been sent to Chief United States District Judge Brian S. Miller. You may file written objections to all or part of this Recommendation. If you do so, those objections must: (1) specifically explain the factual and/or legal basis for your objection, and (2) be received by the Clerk of this Court within fourteen (14) days of this Recommendation. By not ob
More

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION

INSTRUCTIONS

The following proposed Findings and Recommendation have been sent to Chief United States District Judge Brian S. Miller. You may file written objections to all or part of this Recommendation. If you do so, those objections must: (1) specifically explain the factual and/or legal basis for your objection, and (2) be received by the Clerk of this Court within fourteen (14) days of this Recommendation. By not objecting, you may waive the right to appeal questions of fact.

DISPOSITION

Petitioner Willie J. Hartfield ("Hartfield") began this case in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida on March 28, 2019, by filing what was characterized as a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2241. There is no indication that he accompanied his petition with the five dollar filing fee or an application to proceed in forma pauperis. The Southern District of Florida did not address the issue, save to note the following on the docket sheet: "[f]iling fee $5.00 not paid/no ifp filed." See Docket Entry 1. On May 30, 2019, the petition was transferred to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas.

The undersigned reviewed the record and determined that Hartfield must either pay the five dollar filing fee or obtain permission to proceed in forma pauperis before his petition would be served. He was given up to, and including, July 1, 2019, to either pay the filing fee or file an application to proceed in forma pauperis. The Clerk of the Court was directed to send Hartfield the documents necessary to file an application to proceed in forma pauperis, and the record reflects that the documents were sent to Hartfield at the address he provided. Hartfield was warned that in the event he failed to either pay the filing fee by July 1, 2019, or file an application to proceed in forma pauperis by July 1, 2019, the undersigned would recommend that this case be dismissed without prejudice.

July 1, 2019, has now come and gone, and the Clerk of the Court has no record of Hartfield having paid the five dollar filing fee or filing an application to proceed in forma pauperis. Given Hartfield's failure to do so, it is recommended that this case be dismissed without prejudice.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer