Opinion
No. CIV S-08-1286 KJM P.
October 30, 2008
ORDER
Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, together with an application to proceed in forma pauperis.
Examination of the in forma pauperis application reveals that petitioner is unable to afford the costs of suit. Accordingly, the application to proceed in forma pauperis will be granted. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a).
Petitioner challenges his 2001 Shasta County conviction following his guilty plea to several counts of child molestation. He has previously filed three petitions in this court, challenging the same conviction. The first was dismissed because it contained unexhausted claims. Proffitt v. Kernan, Civ. No. 04-966 GEB GGH P. The next petition was dismissed because it was outside the statute of limitations, while the third was dismissed as successive. Profitt v. Campbell, Civ. No. 06-2143 GEB GGH P; Proffitt v. Subia, Civ. No. 07-2603 MCE EFB P. Petitioner has presented nothing in his repetitious filings of amended petitions in this case that suggests any reason to depart from the ruling in theCampbell case that found the action untimely. See Proffit v. Campbell, Civ. No. 06-2143, Docket Nos. 101, 104.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that:
1. Petitioner's request to proceed in forma pauperis is granted; and
2. This case is dismissed.