Opinion
Civil Action No. 13-cv-02816-BNB
12-03-2013
VINCENTE. LOGGINS, Applicant, v. MICHAEL JACKSON, DIANA ROSS, SMOKY ROBINSON, BARRY GORDIE, GROVER WILLIAMS, and CIESAL EBERHART, Respondents.
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
Applicant, Vincent Loggins, is held at the Colorado Mental Health Institute in Pueblo, Colorado. On October 15, 2013, Mr. Loggins filed a pro se Application for Writ of Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland entered an order on October 17, 2013, directing Mr. Loggins to file an Amended Application. Magistrate Judge Boland determined that Mr. Loggins' Application is prolix and confusing and does not comply with Fed. R. Civ. P. 8. Specifically, Magistrate Judge Boland found that it is not clear whether Mr. Loggins is challenging the conditions of his confinement or the execution of a sentence. Magistrate Judge Boland gave Mr. Loggins an opportunity to file an Amended Application that complies with Rule 8, states claims that are in a manageable format, and allows the Court to determine what claims are being asserted.
Magistrate Judge Boland correctly determined that Mr. Loggins failed to comply with Rule 8 and ordered him to amend. Mr. Loggins, however, has failed to communicate with the Court, and as a result he has failed to comply with Magistrate Judge Boland's October 17, 2013 Order within the time allowed. Therefore, the action will be dismissed.
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 paupers status is denied for the purpose of appeal. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438 (1962). If Mr. Loggins files a notice of appeal he must also pay the full $505 appellate filing fee or file a motion to proceed in forma pampers in 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 file an Amended Application and for failure to prosecute. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that no certificate of appealability shall issue because Mr. Loggins has not made a substantial showing that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the procedural ruling is correct and whether the underlying claim has constitutional merit. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that leave to proceed in forma pampers on appeal is denied.
DATED at Denver, Colorado, this 3rd day of December, 2013.
BY THE COURT:
________________
LEWIS T. BABCOCK, Senior Judge
United States District Court