Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

(HC) Embry v. Guirbino, 1:04-cv-06101-AWI-SAB-HC. (2017)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20171117999 Visitors: 9
Filed: Nov. 16, 2017
Latest Update: Nov. 16, 2017
Summary: ORDER DENYING MOTIONS TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS ON APPEAL AS UNNECESSARY (Doc. Nos. 41, 42) ANTHONY W. ISHII , Senior District Judge . Petitioner is a state prisoner who proceeded pro se and in forma pauperis with a 2254 petition for writ of habeas corpus. On September 15, 2017, the Court denied Petitioner's Rule 60(b) motion. Doc. No. 37. On October 13, 2017, Petitioner filed a notice of appeal and motions to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. Doc. Nos. 39-41. A party who is permi
More

ORDER DENYING MOTIONS TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS ON APPEAL AS UNNECESSARY

(Doc. Nos. 41, 42)

Petitioner is a state prisoner who proceeded pro se and in forma pauperis with a § 2254 petition for writ of habeas corpus. On September 15, 2017, the Court denied Petitioner's Rule 60(b) motion. Doc. No. 37. On October 13, 2017, Petitioner filed a notice of appeal and motions to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. Doc. Nos. 39-41.

A party who is permitted to proceed in forma pauperis in the district court may proceed in forma pauperis on appeal without further authorization unless the district court certifies that the appeal is not taken in good faith. See Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(3). Here, Petitioner was previously granted in forma pauperis status on September 24, 2004, Doc. No. 4, and Petitioner's recent affidavit establishes that he is indigent and unable to pay the costs of an appeal. The Court has not and does not certify that Petitioner's appeal is not taken in good faith. Thus, Petitioner is entitled to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal, and his motions shall be denied as unnecessary.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

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