From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Broadbent v. Martel

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jan 29, 2013
No. 2:11-cv-01711-JKS (E.D. Cal. Jan. 29, 2013)

Opinion

No. 2:11-cv-01711-JKS

01-29-2013

JAMUAL BROADBENT, Petitioner, v. M. MARTEL, Warden, Mule Creek State Prison, Respondent.


ORDER

[Re: Motions at Docket Nos. 35 and 36]

At Docket Numbers 35 and 36, Jamual Broadbent, a state prisoner appearing pro se, filed motions to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. There is no filing fee required for a state prisoner to appeal from the denial of a petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Accordingly,

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT the Motions to Proceed In Forma Pauperis at Docket Numbers 35 and 36 are DENIED as moot.

_______________________

JAMES K. SINGLETON, JR.

United States District Judge

Naddi v. Hill, 106 F.3d 275, 277 (9th Cir. 1997).


Summaries of

Broadbent v. Martel

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jan 29, 2013
No. 2:11-cv-01711-JKS (E.D. Cal. Jan. 29, 2013)
Case details for

Broadbent v. Martel

Case Details

Full title:JAMUAL BROADBENT, Petitioner, v. M. MARTEL, Warden, Mule Creek State…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Jan 29, 2013

Citations

No. 2:11-cv-01711-JKS (E.D. Cal. Jan. 29, 2013)