Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_06-cv-04441/USCOURTS-cand-5_06-cv-04441-0/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

Order Granting Motions to Proceed in Forma Pauperis; Order of Dismissal with Leave to Amend

P:\pro-se\sj.jf\hc.06\Alford441ifpdwlta 1

NOT FOR CITATION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RICKEY LOUIS ALFORD,

Petitioner,

 vs.

FRANK ALAMEDA, et al., 

Respondents. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C 06-4441 JF (PR)

ORDER GRANTING

MOTIONS TO PROCEED IN

FORMA PAUPERIS; ORDER

OF DISMISSAL WITH LEAVE

TO AMEND

(Docket Nos. 2, 4)

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, seeks a writ of habeas corpus

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner has filed two motions to proceed in forma

pauperis. The Court will GRANT Petitioner’s motions to proceed in forma pauperis

(docket nos. 2, 4) and DISMISS the instant petition with leave to amend. 

DISCUSSION

A. Standard of Review

A district court may entertain a petition for writ of habeas corpus “in behalf of a 

person in custody pursuant to the judgment of a State court only on the ground that he is

in custody in violation of the Constitution or laws or treaties of the United States.” 

28 U.S.C. § 2254(a); Rose v. Hodges, 423 U.S. 19, 21 (1975). 

A district court shall “award the writ or issue an order directing the respondent to

**Original filed 5/10/07**

Case 5:06-cv-04441-JF Document 5 Filed 05/10/07 Page 1 of 4
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

Order Granting Motions to Proceed in Forma Pauperis; Order of Dismissal with Leave to Amend

P:\pro-se\sj.jf\hc.06\Alford441ifpdwlta 2

show cause why the writ should not be granted, unless it appears from the application that

the applicant or person detained is not entitled thereto.” 28 U.S.C. § 2243. Summary

dismissal is appropriate only where the allegations in the petition are vague or conclusory,

palpably incredible, or patently frivolous or false. See Hendricks v. Vasquez, 908 F.2d

490, 491 (9th Cir. 1990) (quoting Blackledge v. Allison, 431 U.S. 63, 75-76 (1977)). 

B. Petitioner’s Claims

Petitioner challenges his Monterey Superior Court criminal conviction for assault

on a correctional officer. As grounds for relief, Petitioner alleges: “[u]sing a technique

and methodology to leave engine in the car, without taking engine out,” and that

numerous Doctors attacked and kidnaped pursuant to Penal Code § 207. See Petition at

7. 

The Court concludes that Petitioner’s claims are not cognizable under § 2254. A

person in custody pursuant to the judgment of a state court can obtain a federal writ of

habeas corpus only on the ground that he is in custody in violation of the Constitution or

laws or treaties of the United States. 28 U.S.C. § 2254(a). In other words, a writ of

habeas corpus is available under § 2254(a) “only on the basis of some transgression of

federal law binding on the state courts.” Middleton v. Cupp, 768 F.2d 1083, 1085 (9th

Cir. 1985) (citing Engle v. Isaac, 456 U.S. 107, 119 (1982)), cert. denied, 478 U.S. 1021

(1986). Here, Petitioner fails to allege any violation of federal law, treaty, or the 

constitution in his petition. The Court will DISMISS the instant petition with leave to

amend in order for Petitioner to correct these deficiencies. 

CONCLUSION 

1. Petitioner’s motions to proceed in forma pauperis (docket nos. 2, 4) are 

GRANTED. 

2. The instant petition is DISMISSED with leave to amend within thirty 

(30) days from the date of this order. The amended petition must include the caption and

civil case number used in this order (C 06-4441 JF (PR)) and the words “AMENDED

PETITION” on the first page. 

Case 5:06-cv-04441-JF Document 5 Filed 05/10/07 Page 2 of 4
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

Order Granting Motions to Proceed in Forma Pauperis; Order of Dismissal with Leave to Amend

P:\pro-se\sj.jf\hc.06\Alford441ifpdwlta 3

The amendment shall be on the Court’s form for habeas petitions, a copy of which is

enclosed with Petitioner’s copy of this order. 

Petitioner shall take care to write clearly and legibly, so that the Court can read

what he writes. He must clearly state what conviction he is challenging and raise only

one conviction for each habeas petition he files. Petitioner shall allege specific federal

law or constitutional violations and any supporting facts in his grounds for relief. Failure

to file an amended petition will result in the Court dismissing the instant habeas

action without prejudice for failure to state a cognizable claim pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§ 2254. 

3. It is Petitioner’s responsibility to prosecute this case. Petitioner must keep 

the Court informed of any change of address and must comply with the Court’s orders in

a timely fashion. Failure to do so may result in the dismissal of this action for failure to

prosecute pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: _______________ JEREMY FOGEL 

United States District Judge

5/10/07

Case 5:06-cv-04441-JF Document 5 Filed 05/10/07 Page 3 of 4
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

Order Granting Motions to Proceed in Forma Pauperis; Order of Dismissal with Leave to Amend

P:\pro-se\sj.jf\hc.06\Alford441ifpdwlta 4

A copy of this ruling was mailed to the following:

Rickey Louis Alford

J-39242

CSP - Salinas Valley IV

P.O. Box 1060

Soledad, CA 93960

Case 5:06-cv-04441-JF Document 5 Filed 05/10/07 Page 4 of 4