Warden

Valerie Wildman v. Warden

Good Law
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaFebruary 12, 20245:24-cv-00092California2,994 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 EASTERN DIVISION 11 VALERIE WILDMAN, ) No. 5:24-cv-00092-MCS-JDE ) 12 Petitioner, ) ) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 13 v. ) WHY THE PETITION ) 14 UNKNOWN, ) SHOULD NOT BE ) DISMISSED 15 Respondent. ) ) ) 16

17 I. 18 INTRODUCTION 19 On January 5, 2024, Petitioner Valerie Wildman (“Petitioner”), a state 20 prisoner proceeding pro se and seeking to proceed in forma pauperis, filed a 21 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus on a California state form. Dkt. 1 22 (“Petition” or “Pet.”); Dkt. 3 (“IFP Request”). On January 23, 2024, the 23 Honorable Mark C. Scarsi, United States District Judge, found Petitioner had 24 not submitted enough information to determine whether Petitioner is able to 25 pay the filing fee and postponed the IFP Request for 30 days so that Petitioner 26 may provide additional information. Dkt. 5. 27 Under Rule 4 of the Rules Governing…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.