Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05510/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05510-4/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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MICHAEL RAYMOND DIXON, )

 )

Petitioner, )

 )

v. )

) 

 )

TOM CAREY, )

 )

Respondent. )

____________________________________) 

1:04-cv-5510-OWW-TAG HC

Appeal Number 06-16549

ORDER REQUIRING PETITIONER TO

SUBMIT COMPLETED APPLICATION TO

PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS ON

APPEAL OR PAY FILING FEE

ORDER DIRECTING CLERK TO SERVE

COPY OF THIS ORDER ON COURT OF

APPEALS

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas corpus

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. 

On March 20, 2006, Magistrate Judge Theresa A. Goldner issued a Report and

Recommendation that the petition for writ of habeas corpus be dismissed. (Doc. 22). On March 31,

2006, District Judge Oliver W. Wanger adopted the Report and Recommendation and dismissed the

petition. (Doc. 24). Judgment was entered on March 31, 2006. (Doc. 25). 

On April 27, 2006, Petitioner filed a notice of appeal. (Doc. 28). On July 31, 2006, the court

issued an order denying the motion for certificate of appealability (Doc. 27), and on August 16,

2006, the appeal was processed and the file was transmitted to the Court of Appeals for the Ninth

Circuit. (Doc. 30). On August 30, 2006, Petitioner filed a motion for leave to proceed in forma

pauperis on appeal. (Doc. 33). 

A party who was permitted to proceed in forma pauperis in the district court may proceed in

forma pauperis on appeal without further authorization unless the district court certifies that the

appeal is not taken in good faith. See Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(3). In this case, on October 18, 2004, 

///

Case 1:04-cv-05510-OWW -TAG Document 34 Filed 09/27/06 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

Petitioner paid the filing fee and did not proceed in this Court in forma pauperis. (Doc. 9). Thus,

Petitioner is not automatically entitled to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal.

Rule 24(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure states that a party who desires to

appeal in forma pauperis must file a motion in the district court and attach to that motion a

completed application to proceed in forma pauperis, along with the issues the party intends to present

on appeal. Petitioner’s request, however, was not accompanied by a completed application to

proceed in forma pauperis. See 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a); § 1915 (a). 

The Court will provide Petitioner with the opportunity to submit either the appropriate

application and a certified copy of Petitioner’s prison trust account or pay the $455.00 filing fee.

Accordingly, the Court ORDERS that:

1. The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to send Petitioner a copy of the application to

proceed in forma pauperis; 

2. Petitioner is DIRECTED to submit either the completed application, accompanied by

a certified copy of Petitioner’s prison trust account statement for the last six months, or pay the

$455.00 filing fee, within thirty (30) days of the date of service of this order; and

3. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to serve a copy of this order on the Court of

Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 26, 2006 /s/ Theresa A. Goldner 

j6eb3d UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

Case 1:04-cv-05510-OWW -TAG Document 34 Filed 09/27/06 Page 2 of 2