Cisneros

(HC) Tapia v. Cisneros

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaMarch 10, 20223:22-cv-00283California916 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 JAIME G. TAPIA, Case No.: 3:22-cv-00283-LL-RBM

Petitioner,

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO

v. APPOINT COUNSEL AND

DISMISSING CASE WITHOUT

T. CISNEROS, Warden,

PREJUDICE

15 Respondent. [ECF Nos. 1, 2] 16 On February 25, 2022, Petitioner, a California prisoner proceeding pro se,1 filed a Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (“Section 2254”) in the District Court for the Eastern District of California. ECF No. 1. The Petition was accompanied by a Motion to Appoint Counsel. ECF No. 2. The Petition was transferred to this Court because it challenges a conviction from the San Diego County Superior Court. ECF No. 3. FAILURE TO SATISFY FILING FEE REQUIREMENT Petitioner has neither paid the $5.00 filing fee nor submitted an application to

26 In reviewing Petitioner’s Petition, the Court is mindful that “[a] document filed pro se is to be liberally construed … and a pro se [pleading],…

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.