Opinion
2:22-cv-1159-EFB (HC)
07-27-2022
MICHAEL LITTLETON, Petitioner, v. SACRAMENTO COUNTY, Respondent.
ORDER
EDMUND F. BRENNAN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Petitioner is a county jail inmate proceeding without counsel. He commenced this action using a state court form for a petition for writ of habeas corpus. ECF No. 1. Since then, he has filed various declarations, “new information,” supplements, and a motion for a preliminary injunction. ECF Nos. 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10.
It is unclear whether petitioner intends to proceed with this case as a habeas action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 or as a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Habeas petitions and civil rights complaints provide exclusive vehicles for relief and may not be pursued concurrently in a single action. See Nettles v. Grounds, 830 F.3d 922, 931 (9th Cir. 2016) (holding that if a state prisoner's claim would not necessarily lead to immediate or speedier release, it may not be brought in habeas corpus but must be brought, if at all, under § 1983).
Petitioner, however, has neither filed an in forma pauperis application nor paid the required filing fee for a habeas action ($5.00) or a civil action ($402.00). See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914(a); 1915(a). Petitioner will be provided the opportunity to either submit an in forma pauperis application or the appropriate filing fee.
Accordingly, petitioner has 30 days from the date of service of this order to submit either the appropriate filing fee or the application required by § 1915(a). The Clerk of the Court is directed to mail to petitioner a form application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. Failure to comply with this order may result in the dismissal of this action.
So ordered.