Unknown

(HC) Holsey v. Unknown

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJanuary 6, 20202:19-cv-02485California784 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 LEROY DALE HOLSEY, No. 2:19-cv-02485 GGH P Petitioner, v. ORDER UNKNOWN, Respondent. 16 17 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, together with a request to proceed in forma pauperis. Petitioner’s in forma pauperis application does not make the showing required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1). Petitioner has failed to complete the entire first page of the application. See ECF No. 2 at 1. Accordingly, petitioner will be afforded another opportunity to renew the in forma pauperis application in proper form. Rule 2 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases provides that the petition: “shall specify all the grounds for relief which are available to the petitioner and of which he has or by the exercise of reasonable diligence should have knowledge and shall set forth in summary form the facts supporting each of the grounds thus…

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.