Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_21-cv-00187/USCOURTS-caed-1_21-cv-00187-8/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

MICHAEL ALLEN YOCOM,

Petitioner,

v.

KATHLEEN ALLISON, LAURA 

ELDRIDGE, AND ATTORNEY 

GENERAL,

Respondent.

Case No. 1:21-cv-00187-NONE-HBK

ORDER STRIKING PETITIONER’S 

UNAUTHORIZED PLEADING FROM THE 

RECORD

(Doc. No. 27)

Petitioner Michael Allen Yocom, a state pre-trial detainee proceeding pro se, has pending 

a petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. (Doc. No. 1). Before the court is 

petitioner’s “Request for Judicial Notice.” (Doc. No. 27). To the extent discernable, petitioner 

contends he is not guilty of his underlying conviction. (Id.). The court strikes the pleading as an 

authorized pleading. 

I. BACKGROUND 

Petitioner Michael Allen Yocom initiated this case by filing the instant petition on February 

16, 2021. (Doc. No. 1). Petitioner’s petition challenges petitioner’s May 18, 2018 sentence and 

conviction entered by the Tulare County Superior Court in case no. PCF-340051. (Id). On May 

10, 2021, the court ordered respondents to respond to the petition. (Doc. No. 23). Respondent’s 

response is not yet due. 

Case 1:21-cv-00187-JLT-HBK Document 28 Filed 05/19/21 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

II. APPLICABLE LAW AND ANALYSIS

The Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Court provide for the 

filing of a habeas petition (Rule 2), an answer, and a reply (Rule 5). Additional briefing may be 

permitted upon a court order to expand the record (Rule 7). Here, petitioner has submitted a 

pleading which repeats many of the arguments he has made in his petition. (Compare Doc. No. 1 

with Doc. No. 27). The court has not ordered petitioner to submit any additional briefing. To the 

extent petitioner wishes to reassert any facts in support of his petition, he may raise them in his 

reply to respondent’s response. Therefore, the court will order petitioner’s unauthorized pleading 

from the record.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED:

1. Petitioner’s unauthorized pleading (Doc. No. 27) is STRICKEN from the record.

2. The clerk of court is directed to STRIKE Doc. No. 27 from the record.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 18, 2021 

HELENA M. BARCH-KUCHTA

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:21-cv-00187-JLT-HBK Document 28 Filed 05/19/21 Page 2 of 2