Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Charles C. James v. v. Singh

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


July 13, 2012

CHARLES C. JAMES, PETITIONER,
v.
V. SINGH, RESPONDENT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Carolyn K. Delaney United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, together with an application to proceed in forma pauperis.

Examination of the in forma pauperis application reveals that petitioner is unable to afford the costs of suit. Accordingly, the application to proceed in forma pauperis will be granted. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)

In his habeas petition, petitioner challenges dispositions from two separate prison disciplinary proceedings. However, petitioner may only challenge one disciplinary proceeding per habeas action. See Rule 2(e), Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases (habeas petitioner may challenge judgment of only one state court per habeas petition); Crane v. McDonald, No. CIV-S-09-1511 DAD P, 2010 WL 3633616, at *3 (E.D. Cal., Nov. 18, 2010) (habeas petitioner may not challenge two parole proceedings in same action); Melchhionne v. Tilton, No. 1:08-cv-00116 OWW DLB HC, 2008 WL 608385, at *2 (E.D. Cal. March 4, 2008) (habeas petitioner must file three different actions to challenge prison disciplinary proceedings, denial of parole and conviction).

In light of the foregoing, petitioner's original habeas petition will be dismissed. Petitioner will be granted leave to submit an amended petition in which petitioner challenges either of the disciplinary proceedings addressed in his original petition, but not both. If petitioner wishes to challenge other disciplinary proceedings, he must initiate a separate action. Failure to file an amended petition which complies with this order will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Petitioner's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is granted;

2. Petitioner's application for writ of habeas corpus is dismissed;

3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to send petitioner the court's form-application for writ of habeas corpus by state prisoners; and

4. Petitioner is granted thirty days within which to file an amended petition for writ of habeas corpus on the form provided by the Clerk of the Court. In the amended petition petitioner may challenge only one disposition from prison disciplinary disposition.

20120713

© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.