Ruff

(PC) Sahm v. Ruff

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaFebruary 11, 20202:19-cv-02515California2,102 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 STANLEY CARL SAHM, No. 2:19-cv-02515 GGH P Petitioner, v. ORDER CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF

CORRECTIONS AND

REHABILITATION, Respondent. 17 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner has not, however, filed an in forma pauperis affidavit or paid the required filing fee ($5.00). See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914(a); 1915(a). Petitioner will be provided the opportunity to either submit the appropriate affidavit in support of a request to proceed in forma pauperis or submit the appropriate filing fee. The Habeas Petition Petitioner is currently serving a sentence of 30 years to life from a 1988 Sacramento County Superior Court conviction for two counts of second-degree murder. In his habeas petition, petitioner challenges his Comprehensive Risk Assessment by the Board of Parole Hearings dated September 19, 2019 based on fraudulent…

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.