Fisher

(HC) Blakesley v. Fisher

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMay 13, 20202:20-cv-00567California426 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 MARK DANIEL BLAKESLEY, No. 2:20-cv-0567 AC P Petitioner, v. ORDER RAYTHEL FISHER, Warden, Respondent.1 16 Petitioner, a state prisoner under the custody of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR), proceeds pro se with a petition for writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. By order filed March 20, 2020, the court directed petitioner to pay the filing fee ($5.00) or submit an application to proceed in forma pauperis. See ECF No. 3; see also 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914(a), 1915(a). In response, petitioner submitted an incomplete application to proceed in forma pauperis. See ECF No. 6. Petitioner will be provided an additional opportunity to submit the filing fee or a completed application to proceed in forma pauperis. //// 25 A federal petition for writ of habeas corpus must name as respondent the state officer having custody of the petitioner. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254; Rule 2(a) of the Rules…

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.