Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-00531/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-00531-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

TIMOTHY S. CLYDE,

Petitioner,

v.

CALIFORNIA NINTH CIRCUIT 

COURT,

Respondent.

No. 2:14-cv-0531 DAD P

ORDER

Petitioner, a Placer County Jail detainee proceeding pro se, has filed a putative application 

for a federal writ of habeas corpus (challenging his denial of bail on a form used by California 

courts), and putative application to proceed in forma pauperis (by submitting a completed

affidavit for waiver of fee to file a claim with the California Claims Board). However, to obtain 

this court’s further review of this matter, petitioner must comply with the directives set forth 

below. 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that, within thirty days after the filing date of this order, 

petitioner shall:

1. File a completed application to proceed in forma pauperis, on the form used in this 

court and provided with this order, together with a certified copy of petitioner’s jail trust account 

statement for the six-month period preceding the commencement of this action.

/////

Case 2:14-cv-00531-DAD Document 5 Filed 09/25/14 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

2. File a completed petition for writ of habeas corpus, on the form used in this court and 

provided with this order, which identifies a correct respondent and includes an explanation of 

petitioner’s alleged entitlement to present the merits of his claim despite the apparent pendency of 

his trial on criminal charges brought against him in the state courts. See e.g. Younger v. Harris, 

401 U.S. 37, 43-54 (1971) (federal court should refrain from interfering with ongoing state 

criminal proceedings); Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court of Kentucky, 410 U.S. 484, 489 

(1973) (“federal habeas corpus does not lie, absent ‘special circumstances,’ to adjudicate the 

merits of an affirmative defense to a state criminal charge prior to a judgment of conviction by a 

state court”).

3. Failure of petitioner to timely comply with all of these requirements will result in the 

dismissal of this action without prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).

4. The Clerk of Court is directed to send petitioner blank copies of the following: (1) the 

form used in this district to request in forma pauperis status; and (2) the form used in this district 

to petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. 

Dated: September 24, 2014

DAD:4

clyd0531.101a.plus

Case 2:14-cv-00531-DAD Document 5 Filed 09/25/14 Page 2 of 2