Opinion
2:22-cv-01059-APG-VCF
07-13-2023
Ronicia La Tressa Benjamin, Petitioner v. Gabriela Najera, Respondents
ORDER DENYING PETITIONER'S MOTION FOR AMENDED DOCUMENT AND MOTION FOR IFP APPLICATION [ECF NOS. 9, 10]
ANDREW P. GORDON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Petitioner Ronicia La Tressa Benjamin filed a pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. ECF No. 1-1. Before me in this closed habeas matter is Benjamin's motion for amended document (ECF No. 9) and motion for IFP application (ECF No. 10).
I previously dismissed Benjamin's petition without prejudice because her claims were not cognizable in federal habeas. ECF No. 5. I informed Benjamin that her First Amendment claims do not fall within the core of habeas corpus and must, instead, be brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in a new case if she chooses to do so. Id. The Clerk of the Court attached a blank copy of the form complaint for civil rights actions under § 1983. Id. Because this case is closed and the Clerk of the Court has already sent a copy of the § 1983 form complaint, I deny Benjamin's motions.
I THEREFORE ORDER that Benjamin's motion for amended document (ECF No. 9) and motion for IFP application (ECF No. 10) are DENIED.