From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Liggins v. McDonald

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Sep 8, 2011
No. CIV S-11-2336 DAD P (E.D. Cal. Sep. 8, 2011)

Opinion

No. CIV S-11-2336 DAD P

09-08-2011

MAURYCE ANTHONY LIGGINS, Petitioner, v. MIKE D. MCDONALD, Respondent.


ORDER

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner has not, however, filed an in forma pauperis affidavit or paid the required filing fee ($5.00). See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914(a); 1915(a). Petitioner will be provided the opportunity to either submit the appropriate affidavit in support of a request to proceed in forma pauperis or submit the appropriate filing fee.

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Petitioner shall submit, within thirty days from the date of this order, an affidavit in support of his request to proceed in forma pauperis or the appropriate filing fee; petitioner's failure to comply with this order will result in the dismissal of this action; and

2. The Clerk of the Court is directed to send petitioner a copy of the in forma pauperis form used by this district.

DALE A. DROZD

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

DAD:mp

ligg2336.101a


Summaries of

Liggins v. McDonald

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Sep 8, 2011
No. CIV S-11-2336 DAD P (E.D. Cal. Sep. 8, 2011)
Case details for

Liggins v. McDonald

Case Details

Full title:MAURYCE ANTHONY LIGGINS, Petitioner, v. MIKE D. MCDONALD, Respondent.

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

Date published: Sep 8, 2011

Citations

No. CIV S-11-2336 DAD P (E.D. Cal. Sep. 8, 2011)