Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_06-cv-04054/USCOURTS-cand-5_06-cv-04054-0/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 Petitioner’s Motion to Proceed in Forma Pauperis; Order of Dismissal with Leave to Amend

P:\pro-se\sj.jf\hc.06\Alford054ifpdwlta 1

NOT FOR CITATION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RICKEY LOUIS ALFORD,

Petitioner,

 vs.

SALINAS VALLEY STATE PRISON, 

Respondent. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C 06-4054 JF (PR)

ORDER GRANTING MOTION

TO PROCEED IN FORMA

PAUPERIS; ORDER OF

DISMISSAL WITH LEAVE TO

AMEND

(Docket No. 2)

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

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner also filed a motion to proceed in forma pauperis. 

The instant habeas action was transferred to this Court from the United States District

Court for the Central District of California on June 29, 2006. The Court will GRANT

Petitioner’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis (docket no. 2) 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.” 

**Original filed 4/16/07**

Case 5:06-cv-04054-JF Document 7 Filed 04/16/07 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 Petitioner’s Motion to Proceed in Forma Pauperis; Order of Dismissal with Leave to Amend

P:\pro-se\sj.jf\hc.06\Alford054ifpdwlta 2

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

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 and his Monterey Superior Court competency trial. As grounds

for relief, Petitioner claims that his public defenders covered up his rule violation reports,

illegally took his medical records, and maintained correspondence with the correctional

counselors named in his pending civil rights action. See Petition at 3-4. 

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 notes that Petitioner cites to 18 U.S.C. § 1506,

Theft or Altercation of Record or Process. However, this federal criminal statute is not

cognizable as a claim for relief under § 2254. The Court notes that Petitioner can

challenge only one conviction per petition -- that is, if he wishes to challenge two separate

convictions, he must file two separate petitions. The Court will DISMISS the instant

petition with leave to amend in order for Petitioner to correct these deficiencies. 

\\\ 

Case 5:06-cv-04054-JF Document 7 Filed 04/16/07 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 Petitioner’s Motion to Proceed in Forma Pauperis; Order of Dismissal with Leave to Amend

P:\pro-se\sj.jf\hc.06\Alford054ifpdwlta 3

CONCLUSION 

1. Petitioner’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis (docket no. 2) is 

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 06-4054 JF (PR)) and the words “AMENDED

PETITION” on the first page. 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

4/16/07

Case 5:06-cv-04054-JF Document 7 Filed 04/16/07 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 Petitioner’s Motion to Proceed in Forma Pauperis; Order of Dismissal with Leave to Amend

P:\pro-se\sj.jf\hc.06\Alford054ifpdwlta 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-04054-JF Document 7 Filed 04/16/07 Page 4 of 4