UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

ZELDA TAYLOR, #872106,

Petitioner,

v. CASE NO. 2:15-CV-11960 

HONORABLE GERALD E. ROSEN

ANTHONY STEWART, 

Respondent.

_____________________________________/

OPINION AND ORDER DISMISSING THE PETITION FOR A WRIT OF

HABEAS CORPUS AND DENYING A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY

The Court has before it Michigan prisoner Zelda Taylor’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus

filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner did not pay the required $5.00 filing fee when she

instituted this action, nor did she submit an application to proceed in forma pauperis. See 28 U.S.C.

§ 1914(a); 28 U.S.C. § 1915; Rule 3 of the Rules Governing § 2254 Cases. The Court, therefore,

issued an Order to Correct Deficiency on June 9, 2015 requiring Petitioner to either pay the filing

fee or submit a properly completed in forma pauperis application. The order provided that if she

did not do so within 21 days, her case would be dismissed. The time for submitting the filing fee

or required information has elapsed and Petitioner has failed to correct the deficiency. In response

to the Court’s order, Petitioner submitted a letter dated June 15, 2015 indicating that she had

requested the $5.00 filing fee from the prison business office, that she believed that the check had

been issued, and that she would provide confirmation to the Court as soon as possible. In the

ensuing months, however, the Court has not received the filing fee – or any further correspondence

2:15-cv-11960-GER-EAS Doc # 5 Filed 10/06/15 Pg 1 of 3 Pg ID 85
from Petitioner. It is Petitioner’s responsibility to ensure that the fee is received by the Court. She

has not done so.

Accordingly, the Court DISMISSES WITHOUT PREJUDICE the petition for a writ of

habeas corpus. The Court makes no determination as to the merits of the petition. This case is

CLOSED. Should Petitioner wish to seek federal habeas relief in this Court, she may submit a new

habeas petition with payment of the filing fee or an in forma pauperis application. 

Before Petitioner may appeal the Court’s decision, a certificate of appealability must issue. 

See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(a); Fed. R. App. P. 22(b). A certificate of appealability may issue “only

if the applicant has made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(2). When a federal court denies relief on procedural grounds without addressing the

merits of a habeas petition, a certificate of appealability should issue if it is shown that jurists of

reason would find it debatable whether the petitioner states a valid claim of the denial of a

constitutional right and that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the district court was

correct in its procedural ruling. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484-85 (2000). Reasonable jurists

could not debate the correctness of the Court’s procedural ruling. Accordingly, the Court DENIES

a certificate of appealability.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Gerald E. Rosen 

Chief Judge, United States District Court

Dated: October 6, 2015

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the parties and/or counsel

of record on October 6, 2015, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.

2

2:15-cv-11960-GER-EAS Doc # 5 Filed 10/06/15 Pg 2 of 3 Pg ID 86
s/Julie Owens 

Case Manager, (313) 234-5135

3

2:15-cv-11960-GER-EAS Doc # 5 Filed 10/06/15 Pg 3 of 3 Pg ID 87