Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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

Favor v. Stevenson-Bridges

United States District Court, E.D. California

June 26, 2019

BRANDON ALEXANDER FAVOR, Plaintiff,
v.
MARCIA STEVENSON-BRIDGES, et al., Defendants.

          ORDER DISMISSING ACTION FOR VIOLATION OF PREFILING ORDER

         On June 17, 2019, plaintiff Brandon Alexander Favor, appearing pro se, filed a complaint, a motion to appoint counsel, and a motion for modification of his state court imposed sentence. (Doc. Nos. 1, 2, 3.)

         This court has previously declared plaintiff to be a vexatious litigant in Favor v. Wimfroy, No. 1:17-cv-00944-AWI-JLT (HC) (E.D. Cal.). A September 27, 2017 order made plaintiff subject to pre-filing review of all future habeas corpus petitions. Pursuant to the pre-filing order: To file any habeas corpus petition, Petitioner must:

(a) Include with the petition a copy of this Vexatious Litigant Order;
(b) Include with the petition the filing fee or a completed application to proceed in forma pauperis, along with a certified copy of his prison trust account statement;
(c) Use the proper form for a habeas corpus action;
(d) Name the proper parties;
(e) Clearly and concisely specify the grounds for relief and facts supporting each ground,
(f) Include only claims that allege violations of the Federal Constitution;
(g) Include only claims that are the proper subject matter for a habeas corpus petition;
(h) Prove that Petitioner has exhausted his state court remedies by having presented the petition's claims to the California Supreme Court in a procedurally proper form, and prove that his direct appeal concerning the conviction being challenged has been ruled on by the California Court of Appeal;
(i) Show that Petitioner is in custody to challenge the conviction that the claims arise from; and
(j) Show that any arrest Petitioner challenges led to a conviction Petitioner is in custody to challenge; Upon receipt of any habeas corpus petition filed by Petitioner, the Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to mark the petition “Received.” The Court will then screen the petition to determine if the above requirements are met. Only if Petitioner meets all of these requirements will the Court file any future habeas petition submitted by Petitioner. All other habeas petitions will be returned to Petitioner.

Favor v. Wimfroy, No. 1:17-cv-00944-AWI-JLT (HC) (E.D. Cal. Sept. 27, 2017).

         Here, although plaintiff filed this action using a civil rights complaint form, upon review thereof, the court finds that plaintiff's complaint must be brought as a habeas petition. The complaint recounts the actions of plaintiff and an unidentified individual on November 8, 2004. (Doc. No. 1 at 6-9.) Although the allegations of the complaint are somewhat unintelligible, it appears plaintiff is asserting a violation of his Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel, and seeks relief of “State referral, Bond ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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