Bonilla

Bonilla v. Alameda County District Attorney

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaMay 11, 20233:23-cv-00772California959 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 3 Steven Wayne BONILLA, Case No.: 23-cv-0772-AGS-BLM

Petitioner,

ORDER DISMISSING PETITION

v. (ECF 1) WITHOUT PREJUDICE

AND CLOSING CASE

ALAMEDA COUNTY DISTRICT

ATTORNEY,

8 Respondent. 9 For four separate reasons, the Court dismisses this petition for a writ of habeas corpus and closes this case. A. Filing Fee Petitioner Steven Bonilla has neither paid the $5.00 filing fee nor applied to proceed in forma pauperis. His petition is therefore subject to dismissal without prejudice. See Rules Governing § 2254 Cases, Rule 3(a), 28 U.S.C. foll. § 2254. B. Jurisdiction and Venue A habeas corpus petition may be filed in the United States District Court for either the federal judicial district within which the petitioner is confined or the one within which he was convicted. 28 U.S.C. § 2241(d). Bonilla is presently confined at California Medical Facility in Vacaville, Solano County, California, within the boundaries of the Eastern 21 …

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.