IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
May 23, 2012
ROBIN GILLEN STARR, PETITIONER,
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ET AL., RESPONDENTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Kendall J. Newman United States Magistrate Judge
Petitioner is a state prisoner, proceeding without counsel, with a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On April 30, 2012, the court ordered petitioner to show cause why this action should not be dismissed for his refusal to accept mail from the court. On May 16, 2012, petitioner filed an amended petition. Because petitioner has demonstrated an interest in litigating this action, the order to show cause is discharged.
In the original petition, petitioner appeared to challenge convictions from both Yolo County and Sacramento. On March 26, 2012, the court dismissed the original petition with leave to file an amended petition raising only his claims challenging the Yolo County conviction. Petitioner did not receive this order based on his previous refusal to accept mail from the court.
Petitioner's amended petition is largely unintelligible. For this reason, the amended petition is dismissed with leave to amend. A second amended petition must be prepared on the habeas form provided by the court.
On May 18, 2012, petitioner filed a motion for a hearing. Because no hearing is warranted at this time, the motion for hearing is denied. On May 21, 2012, petitioner filed a motion to correct errors in his files and probation report. Because petitioner does not have a colorable petition on file, this motion is denied without prejudice.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. The Clerk of the Court is directed to re-serve petitioner with the March 26, 2012 order;
2. Petitioner is granted thirty days to file an amended petition; failure to file an amended petition will result in dismissal of this action;
3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to send petitioner the form for a habeas corpus petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254;
4. Petitioner's motion for a hearing (Dkt. No. 10) and motion to correct records, etc. (Dkt. No. 11) are denied;
5. The April 30, 2012 order to show cause is discharged.
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.