(HC)Brown

(HC)Brown v. Thompson

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaApril 12, 20222:21-cv-01816California1,906 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 BREYON BROWN, No. 2:21-cv-1816 JAM DB P Petitioner, v. ORDER PAUL THOMPSON, Respondent. 15 Petitioner, a federal prisoner, proceeds without counsel with a petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. (ECF No. 1.) Petitioner has paid the filing fee. Upon screening of the petition, it plainly appears the petition is both unripe and unexhausted. Petitioner will be given an opportunity to amend before the undersigned recommends dismissal of this case. I. Screening Standards In screening the petition brought under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, the court applies the Rule 4 framework of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Court. E.g., Battle v. Holbrook, No. 2:20-cv-01851-JAM-JDP, 2021 WL 4132336, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Sept. 10, 2021); see 28 U.S.C. foll. § 2254, Rule 1(b) (“The district court may apply any or all of these rules to a habeas corpus petition not covered by Rule 1(a).”).…

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.