(HC) Brown v. North Kern State Prison Warden
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
KENYON D. BROWN, Case No. 1:20-cv-01043-NONE-EPG-HC
Petitioner, ORDER DENYING AS MOOT MOTION TO
PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS
v. (ECF No. 12) NORTH KERN STATE PRISON WARDEN, Respondent.
16 Petitioner is a state prisoner who proceeded pro se with a § 2254 petition for writ of habeas corpus. On October 7, 2020, the Court dismissed the petition for writ of habeas corpus. (ECF No. 12). On October 19, 2020, the Court received Petitioner’s the instant motion to proceed in forma pauperis. (ECF No. 14). In light of the procedural posture of this case, the Court construes the motion as a motion to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. See Castro v. United States, 540 U.S. 375, 381–82 (2003) (courts may recharacterize a pro se motion to “create a better correspondence between the substance of a pro se motion’s claim and its underlying legal basis”); Bernhardt v. Los Angeles County, 339 F.3d 920, 925 (9th Cir. 2003) (courts have a duty to construe pro se pleadings and motions liberally). …