Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01498/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01498-2/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

MARION C. WOLFE, JR., 

Petitioner, No. CIV S-05-1498 MCE KJM P

vs.

JEANNE WOODFORD, et al., 

Respondents. ORDER 

 /

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed an application for a writ of

habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, challenging the deprivation of conduct credits. On

August 11, 2005, the court issued findings and recommendations, recommending that the action

be dismissed for petitioner’s failure to exhaust state remedies.

On October 21, 2005, petitioner filed a motion for permission to file exhibits,

showing he has exhausted his state remedies, along with copies of those exhibits. Based on this

showing of exhaustion of state remedies, the court vacates its August 11, 2005 findings and

recommendations.

However, the court finds the allegations in the petition so vague and conclusory

that it is unable to determine whether the current petition challenges the procedures at the initial

disciplinary hearing, a subsequent hearing or the denial of his request for restoration of the credit

Case 2:05-cv-01498-MCE -KJM Document 13 Filed 10/28/05 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

lost as the result of the first disciplinary hearing. For example, petitioner discusses the

deficiencies at the hearing on his second rules violation report, but on the cover sheet of the

petition, he claims to be challenging the August 3, 2004 refusal to restore his conduct credit. 

The court has determined that the complaint does not contain a short and plain statement as

required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). Although the Federal Rules adopt a flexible pleading policy,

a pleading must give fair notice of the claim plainly and succinctly. Jones v. Community Redev.

Agency, 733 F.2d 646, 649 (9th Cir. 1984). Petitioner will be provided an opportunity to file an

amended petition that complies with the Federal Rules. 

Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Petitioner’s request to file exhibits showing exhaustion of state remedies is

granted. 

2. The findings and recommendations of August 11, 2005 are vacated.

3. The petition is dismissed. 

4. Petitioner is granted thirty days from the date of service of this order to file an

amended application that complies with the requirements of the Federal Rules of Civil

Procedure; that any amended application must bear the docket number assigned this case and

must be labeled “Amended Application;” that petitioner must file an original and one copy of the

amended application for each respondent; that his failure to file an amended application in

accordance with this order will result in the dismissal of this action. 

5. The Clerk of Court is directed to send petitioner the form for use in filing a

habeas petition with this court.

/////

/////

/////

/////

/////

Case 2:05-cv-01498-MCE -KJM Document 13 Filed 10/28/05 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

6. Petitioner’s July 26, 2005 motion for an order directing the prison to process

his request to proceed in forma pauperis is denied as motion as petitioner has been granted leave

to proceed in forma pauperis. 

DATED: October 27, 2005.

______________________________________

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2/wolf1498.dlta

Case 2:05-cv-01498-MCE -KJM Document 13 Filed 10/28/05 Page 3 of 3