Opinion
Civil Action No. 14-cv-02516-BNB
10-16-2014
MATTHEW J. HOUNSHELL, Applicant, v. ADAMS COUNTY DETENTION FAC., Respondent.
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
Applicant, Matthew J. Hounshell, is held at the Colorado Mental Health Institute in Pueblo, Colorado. Applicant initiated this action by filing pro se an Application for a Writ of Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. On September 10, 2014, Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland directed Applicant to cure certain deficiencies if he wished to pursue his claims. Specifically, Magistrate Judge Boland instructed Applicant either to pay the $5 filing fee or in the alternative submit a request to proceed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 in a habeas action.
Magistrate Judge Boland warned Applicant that the action would be dismissed without further notice if he failed to cure the deficiencies within thirty days. On September 24, 2014, Applicant submitted a Prisoner's Motion and Affidavit for Leave to Proceed Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. Applicant, however, did not include a certified account statement showing the current amount of money he has in his account at the Colorado Mental Health Institute and the § 1915 form he used is not the correct form. The action, therefore, will be dismissed for failure to comply with a court order within the time allowed.
The Court also certifies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this Order is not taken in good faith, and, therefore, in forma pauperis status will be denied for the purpose of appeal. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438 (1962). If Applicant files a notice of appeal he must pay the full $505 appellate filing fee or file a motion to proceed in forma pauperis in the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit within thirty days in accordance with Fed. R. App. P. 24. Accordingly, it is
ORDERED that the Application is denied and the action is dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) for failure to cure all deficiencies and for failure to prosecute. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal is denied. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that no certificate of appealability shall issue because Applicant has failed to show that jurists of reason would find it debatable that the district court was correct in its procedural ruling. See Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484-85 (2000). It is
FURTHER ORDERED that all pending motions are denied as moot.
DATED at Denver, Colorado, this 16th day of October, 2014.
BY THE COURT:
s/Lewis T. Babcock
LEWIS T. BABCOCK, Senior Judge
United States District Court