Young v. No Named Respondent

Full title: MATTHEW SLADE YOUNG, Applicant, v. [NO NAMED RESPONDENT], Respondent.

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Date published: Oct 1, 2012

Civil Action No. 12-cv-02235-LTB (D. Colo. Oct. 1, 2012)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 12-cv-02235-BNB

10-01-2012

MATTHEW SLADE YOUNG, Applicant, v. [NO NAMED RESPONDENT], Respondent.

LEWIS T. BABCOCK

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Applicant, Matthew Slade Young, currently is detained at the Arapahoe County Detention Facility in Centennial, Colorado. Mr. Young, acting pro se, initiated this action by submitting a Letter requesting a review of his state criminal cases. On August 22, 2012, Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland instructed Mr. Young to cure certain deficiencies if he wished to pursue his claims. Specifically, Magistrate Judge Boland ordered Mr. Young to file his claims on a Court-approved form used in filing a 28 U.S.C. § 2254 action and either to submit a Motion and Affidavit for Leave to Proceed Pursuant to 28 U.S.C.§ 1915 or in the alternative to pay the $5.00 filing fee. Mr. Young was warned that the action would be dismissed without further notice if he failed to cure the deficiencies within thirty days.

Mr. Young now has failed to communicate with the Court, and as a result he has failed to cure the deficiencies within the time allowed. The action will be dismissed for failure to comply with the August 22, 2012 Order.

Finally, the Court 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 pauperis status will be denied for the purpose of appeal. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438 (1962). If Mr. Young files a notice of appeal he must also pay the full $455 appellate filing fee or file a motion to proceed in forma pauperis in the United States Court of Appeals for 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 cure the deficiencies and for failure to prosecute. It is

FURTHER ORDERED that leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal is denied.

DATED at Denver, Colorado, this 1st day of October, 2012.

BY THE COURT:

____________

LEWIS T. BABCOCK, Judge

United States District Court