Bonilla

Bonilla v. Battaglia

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaSeptember 27, 20193:19-cv-01827California1,253 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 STEVEN WAYNE BONILLA, Case No.: 19cv1827 LAB (AHG) Petitioner,

ORDER DISMISSING CASE

v. WITHOUT PREJUDICE ANTHONY BATTAGLIA, et al., Respondents. 16 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a document this Court construes as a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254.1 FAILURE TO SATSIFY FILING FEE REQUIREMENT Petitioner has failed to pay the $5.00 filing fee and has failed to move to proceed in forma pauperis. This Court cannot proceed until Petitioner has either paid the $5.00 filing fee or qualified to proceed in forma pauperis. See Rule 3(a), 28 U.S.C. foll. § 2254. 23 24 1 Because Petitioner is a state prisoner seeking “immediate release” from state custody (see Pet. at 3, ECF No. 1), this Court liberally construes the document as a petition for 26 writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. See Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007) (per…

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.