Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-00728/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-00728-2/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Jesus Aleman
Petitioner
CDCR
Respondent

Document Text:

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

On August 4, 2016, the Court entered judgment denying the petition for writ of habeas 

corpus. On September 12, 2016, Petitioner filed a notice of appeal and an application to proceed 

in forma pauperis. 

Pursuant to the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure,

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

. . . may proceed on appeal in forma pauperis without further authorization, unless:

(A) the district court -- before or after the notice of appeal is filed --

certifies that the appeal is not taken in good faith or finds that the party is 

not otherwise entitled to proceed in forma pauperis and states in writing its 

reasons for the certification or finding; or

(B) a statute provides otherwise.

Fed. R.App. P. 24(a)(3). 

Because Petitioner was proceeding in forma pauperis in this action, he is entitled to 

proceed in forma pauperis on appeal unless the Court finds his appeal is not taken in good faith or 

JESUS ALEMAN,

Petitioner,

v.

CDCR,

Respondent.

1:14-cv-00728-LJO-JLT (HC)

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO PROCEED 

IN FORMA PAUPERIS ON APPEAL AND 

DIRECTING CLERK TO SERVE THE COURT 

OF APPEALS

(Doc. 28)

Case 1:14-cv-00728-LJO-JLT Document 31 Filed 09/22/16 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

finds that he is not otherwise entitled to proceed in forma pauperis. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3). “In 

the absence of some evident improper motive, the applicant's good faith is established by the 

presentation of any issue that is not plainly frivolous.” Ellis v. United States, 356 U.S. 674 

(1958). An action is frivolous “where it lacks an arguable basis either in law or in fact.” Neitzke 

v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989), or where “the result is obvious or the arguments are 

wholly without merit.” Davis v. Graves, 2007 WL 4207804, *1 (E.D. Cal. Nov. 27, 2007) (citing 

Cannon v. Hawaii Corp. (In re Cannon), 796 F.2d 1139, 1144 (9th Cir. 1986).

Here, Petitioner does not state which issues he wishes to appeal, and the Court can find no 

valid ground on which an appeal can be based. The Court thoroughly reviewed Petitioner’s 

claims and found them to be wholly without merit. Consequently, the Court certifies that any 

appeal taken from the Court's denial of the petition would be frivolous and therefore not taken in 

good faith. Fed. R.App. P. 24(a)(3)(A); Ellis, 356 U.S. at 674–75; Hooker v. American Airlines, 

302 F.3d 1091, 1092 (9th Cir. 2002). 

Accordingly, the Court DENIES Petitioner’s motion for leave to appeal in forma 

pauperis. 28 U.S.C. ' 1915(a)(3). The Clerk is directed to serve a copy of this order on the 

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 22, 2016 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:14-cv-00728-LJO-JLT Document 31 Filed 09/22/16 Page 2 of 2