Dahir v. Bolin

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

Bakil Dahir, Case No. 21-cv-1617 (KMM/JFD)

Petitioner,

v. ORDER William Bolin,

Respondent.

On December 7, 2022, the Court denied petitioner Bakil Dahir’s petition for habeas relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2554 and declined to issue a certificate of appealability. [ECF 19]. Dahir has filed a notice of appeal and now moves for permission to appeal in forma pauperis (“IFP”). [ECF 24]. A party who seeks to be excused from paying the filing fee for an appeal in a federal case may apply for in forma pauperis (“IFP”) status. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1); Fed. R. App. P. 24(a). To qualify for IFP status, a party must demonstrate that he cannot afford to pay the full filing fee. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1). However, “[a]n appeal may not be taken in forma pauperis if the trial court certifies in writing that it is not taken in good faith.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3). Good faith is demonstrated when a defendant seeks appellant review of any non-frivolous issue. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 445 (1962). Based on the disclosures in Dahir’s IFP application, the Court concludes that he is financially eligible for IFP status. Further, although the Court is satisfied that it properly dismissed Dahir’s 28 U.S.C. § 2554 petition, the Court does not deem his appeal to be frivolous. Therefore, the Court grants Dahir’s IFP application. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioner’s motion to appeal in

forma pauperis [ECF 24] is GRANTED.

Date: February 15, 2023 s/Katherine Menendez Katherine Menendez