Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01995/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01995-0/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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ADAM DAVID LADUCA,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-05-1995 FCD DAD P

vs.

C.M. HARRISON, Warden,

Respondent. ORDER

 /

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

corpus attacking his Sutter County conviction. The petition was lodged in the United States

District Court for the Central District of California on June 24, 2005, and has been transferred to

the Eastern District of California pursuant to an order filed September 7, 2005, granting

respondent’s unopposed motion to transfer the petition. The matter has been referred to the

undersigned in accordance with Local Rule 72-302 and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

On October 3, 2005, this court received a 51-page record that includes copies of

the docket, documents 1 through 7, two clerk’s notices, and the transmittal letter. The 51-page

record has been docketed as a single document titled “CASE TRANSFERRED IN.” The Clerk

will be directed to file and docket as a separate document the 24-page habeas petition lodged in

the Central District and docketed as document #1.

Case 2:05-cv-01995-FCD-DAD Document 4 Filed 11/10/05 Page 1 of 3
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

2

A review of the record reveals that petitioner was notified by the Central District

court that his in forma pauperis application is incomplete. The Central District subsequently

received from petitioner a copy of his prison trust account statement. The statement, which is

dated July 21, 2005, and covers the period from January 1, 2005, through July 21, 2005, reflects

that there was no activity in petitioner’s account during that period and that petitioner had a

negative balance of $165.55 owed for copies and postage. It does not appear that the Central

District court made any further order concerning petitioner’s in forma pauperis application. 

Although petitioner did not submit a certificate of funds completed and signed by an authorized

officer at the prison, the undersigned is satisfied that petitioner is unable to afford the costs of

suit. Accordingly, petitioner’s application to proceed in forma pauperis will be granted. See 28

U.S.C. § 1915(a).

Since petitioner may be entitled to relief if the claimed violations of constitutional

rights are proved, respondent will be directed to file a response to the habeas petition.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Petitioner’s application to proceed in forma pauperis is granted; 

2. The Clerk of the Court is directed to file the 24-page petition for writ of habeas

corpus that was docketed as document #1 in the Central District as a separate document filed in

the Eastern District on October 3, 2005; the separately filed petition shall consist solely of the 10-

page form petition and the 14-page transcript appended to the petition; the Clerk shall affix this

court’s case number to the first page of the petition before filing it;

3. Respondent’s response to the habeas petition shall be filed and served within

thirty days from the date of this order. See Rule 4, Fed. R. Governing § 2254 Cases. An answer

shall be accompanied by all transcripts and other documents relevant to the issues presented in

the petition. See Rule 5, Fed. R. Governing § 2254 Cases;

4. If the response to the petition is an answer, petitioner’s reply shall be filed and

served within thirty days after service of the answer;

Case 2:05-cv-01995-FCD-DAD Document 4 Filed 11/10/05 Page 2 of 3
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

3

5. If the response to the petition is a motion, petitioner’s opposition or statement

of non-opposition to the motion shall be filed and served within thirty days after service of the

motion, and respondent’s reply shall be filed and served within fifteen days thereafter; and

6. This order shall be served on the pro se petitioner and on counsel who

appeared for respondent in the United States District for the Central District of California; a

courtesy copy of the order shall be served on Jo Graves, Senior Assistant Attorney General.

DATED: November 9, 2005.

DAD:13

ladu1995.100

Case 2:05-cv-01995-FCD-DAD Document 4 Filed 11/10/05 Page 3 of 3