Warden

(HC) Bland v. Warden

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaNovember 2, 20212:21-cv-00518California1,020 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 JOSHUA D. BLAND, No. 2:21-cv-00518 DB P Petitioner, v. ORDER WARDEN, Respondent. 16 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, together with an application to proceed in forma pauperis. Examination of the in forma pauperis application reveals that petitioner is unable to afford the costs of suit. Accordingly, the application to proceed in forma pauperis will be granted. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). Presently before the court is the petition for screening. (ECF No. 1.) Petitioner challenges his 2019 conviction in the Lassen County Superior Court. (Id. at 1.) Petitioner claims the superior court lacked jurisdiction and deprived him of his due process under the Fourteenth Amendment by not disclosing what law the court operated under or how petitioner was “liable to state law.” (Id.) Petitioner will be ordered to show cause why his…

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.