From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mendoza v. Daniels

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
Aug 20, 2013
(M.D.N.C. Aug. 20, 2013)

Opinion

08-20-2013

RICARDO CHAVEZ MENDOZA, Petitioner, v. DENNIS DANIELS, Respondent.


ORDER AND RECOMMENDATION

OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Petitioner, a prisoner of the State of North Carolina, submitted a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for writ of habeas corpus by a person in state custody, together with an application to proceed in forma pauperis. For the following reasons, the Petition cannot be further processed.

The Petition, which was originally filed in the Eastern District of North Carolina, is titled as being brought under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. However, the Eastern District later construed it as a Petition under § 2254 and transferred it to this District.

1. Petitioner has not used the required § 2254 Forms. Rule 2, R. Gov. § 2254 Cases. The Clerk will forward to Petitioner the proper forms.

Because of this pleading failure, the Petition should be filed and then dismissed, without prejudice to Petitioner filing a new petition on the proper habeas corpus forms with the $5.00 filing fee, or a completed application to proceed in forma pauperis, and otherwise correcting the defects noted. The Court has no authority to toll the statute of limitation, therefore it continues to run, and Petitioner must act quickly if he wishes to pursue this petition. See Spencer v. Sutton, 239 F.3d 626 (4th Cir. 2001). To further aid Petitioner, the Clerk is instructed to send Petitioner a new application to proceed in forma pauperis, new § 2254 forms, and instructions for filing a § 2254 petition, which Petitioner should follow.

In forma pauperis status will be granted for the sole purpose of entering this Order and Recommendation.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that in forma pauperis status is granted for the sole purpose of entering this Order and Recommendation. The Clerk is instructed to send Petitioner § 2254 forms, instructions, and a current application to proceed in forma pauperis.

IT IS RECOMMENDED that this action be filed, but then dismissed sua sponte without prejudice to Petitioner filing a new petition which corrects the defects of the current Petition.

____________

L. Patrick Auld

United States Magistrate Judge


Summaries of

Mendoza v. Daniels

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
Aug 20, 2013
(M.D.N.C. Aug. 20, 2013)
Case details for

Mendoza v. Daniels

Case Details

Full title:RICARDO CHAVEZ MENDOZA, Petitioner, v. DENNIS DANIELS, Respondent.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA

Date published: Aug 20, 2013

Citations

(M.D.N.C. Aug. 20, 2013)