From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Martin v. Bear

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
Oct 11, 2016
Case No. CIV-16-1170-D (W.D. Okla. Oct. 11, 2016)

Opinion

Case No. CIV-16-1170-D

10-11-2016

DENNIS MARTIN, Petitioner, v. CARL BEAR, Warden, Respondent.


REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Petitioner, a state prisoner appearing pro se, brings this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 seeking a writ of habeas corpus. Petitioner has filed an Application for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis [Doc. No. 2]. United States District Judge Timothy D. DeGiusti has referred the matter for initial proceedings consistent with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and (C).

A review of Petitioner's Application indicates that Petitioner's institutional account has a balance of $709.66 [Doc. No. 2-1]. Petitioner is financially able to prepay the $5.00 filing fee of this proceeding. Because Petitioner has not shown that he qualifies for authorization to proceed without prepayment of the filing fee, it is recommended that Petitioner's Application be denied. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1); see also Lister v. Department of the Treasury, 408 F.3d 1309, 1312 (10th Cir. 2005).

It is further recommended that if Petitioner does not pay the $5.00 filing fee in full to the Clerk of the Court within twenty-one days of any order adopting this Report and Recommendation, that this action be dismissed without prejudice to refiling, pursuant to LCvR 3.3(e).

NOTICE OF RIGHT TO OBJECT

Petitioner is advised of his right to object to this Report and Recommendation. See 28 U.S.C. § 636 and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72. Any such objection must be filed with the Clerk of the Court on or before November 1, 2016. Petitioner is further advised that failure to make timely objection to this Report and Recommendation waives his right to appellate review of the factual and legal issues addressed herein. Moore v. United States, 950 F.2d 656, 659 (10th Cir. 1991).

ENTERED this 11th day of October, 2016.

/s/_________

BERNARD M. JONES

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

Martin v. Bear

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
Oct 11, 2016
Case No. CIV-16-1170-D (W.D. Okla. Oct. 11, 2016)
Case details for

Martin v. Bear

Case Details

Full title:DENNIS MARTIN, Petitioner, v. CARL BEAR, Warden, Respondent.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA

Date published: Oct 11, 2016

Citations

Case No. CIV-16-1170-D (W.D. Okla. Oct. 11, 2016)