Opinion
22-cv-07235-JST
01-13-2023
In re LADRAKEOUS SONNY DEAN, Petitioner.
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
JON S. TIGAR UNITED STATES JUDGE
On November 17, 2022, the Court docketed a 4-page handwritten document received from Petitioner titled “Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus Pursuant to All Writs Act,” which the Court construed as seeking federal habeas relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. ECF No. 1. That same day, the Court informed Petitioner that his petition was not submitted on the proper form, and that if he did not submit a completed petition on the proper form within twenty-eight days, the action would be dismissed and the file closed. ECF No. 2. The Court sent Plaintiff a blank petition for a writ of habeas corpus form. ECF No. 2. The deadline to file a petition and has passed, and Petitioner has not filed the required documents. This action cannot proceed without a petition on the proper form. Accordingly, this action is DISMISSED for failure to file a petition on the proper form. The dismissal is without prejudice to Petitioner filing a motion to reopen the action. Any motion to reopen must be accompanied by a petition on the proper form. The Clerk shall enter judgment against Plaintiff, and close the case.
The All Writs Act “is a residual source of authority to issue writs that are not otherwise covered by statute. When a statute specifically addresses the particular issue at hand, it is that authority, and not the All Writs Act, that is controlling.” Pa. Bureau of Corr. v. U.S. Marshals Serv., 474 U.S. 34, 43 (1985). The Court presumes that Petitioner seeks release from state custody as he references seeking “immediate or speedier release.” 28 U.S.C. § 2254 specifically addresses that particular issue. However, Petitioner also states that he seeks a “redress of grievances” and the release of commercial debt, proceeds, products, accounts and fixtures. If Petitioner seeks release other than release from custody, a petition for a writ of habeas corpus would not be the proper action to bring.
IT IS SO ORDERED.