Legal Document

517 U.S. 343116 S.Ct. 1311134 L.Ed.2d 464 LIANG-HOUH SHIEHv.EDWARD KAKITA et al. No. 95-7587 SHIEH v. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT 95-7588 JEROLD KRIEGER 95-7589 On motions for leave to proceed in forma pauperis Nos. 95-7587, and 95-7589. Supreme Court of the United States Decided April 1, 1996 Per Curiam. 1 In these three petitions certiorari, pro se petitioner Liang-Houh Shieh requests under Rule 39 this Court. We deny his pursuant 39.8. is allowed until 22, 1996, within which pay docketing fees required by 38 submit compliance with Court's 33.1. also direct Clerk not accept any further certiorari from noncriminal matters unless he pays fee submits petition 2 has abused process. March we invoked 39.8 status. See State Bar California, 516 U. S. ___. To date, filed 10 less than years. All have been both patently frivolous denied without recorded dissent. 3 enter order barring prospective filings reasons discussed Martin District Columbia Appeals, 506 (1992). Shieh's abuse writ cases, so limit our sanction accordingly. The will prevent petitioning challenge criminal sanctions might be imposed against him. will, however, allow devote its limited resources claims petitioners who 4 It ordered. 5 djq Justice Stevens, dissenting. 6 For I previously expressed, respectfully 7 Jones ABC-TV, ___, ___ (1996) (Stevens, J., dissenting); Attwood Singletary, (1992) Zatko 502 16, 18 (1991) J.,dissenting).

Classification Label: 1