Fierro v. Arizona, State of

CourtDistrict Court, D. Arizona
DecidedMarch 7, 2022
Docket2:22-cv-00153
StatusUnknown

This text of Fierro v. Arizona, State of (Fierro v. Arizona, State of) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. Arizona primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Fierro v. Arizona, State of, (D. Ariz. 2022).

Opinion

1 WO MH 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 8 9 Jose Luis Tapia Fierro, No. CV 22-00153-PHX-JAT (ESW) 10 Petitioner, 11 v. ORDER 12 State of Arizona, 13 Respondent.

14 15 Petitioner Jose Luis Tapia Fierro, who is confined in the Arizona State Prison 16 Complex-Florence, has filed a pro se “Protective (28 U.S.C. § 2254) Habeas Corpus 17 Petition” (Doc. 1), which the Court construes as a Motion for Stay and Petition for Writ of 18 Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §2254. The Court will deny the Motion with leave 19 to refile, dismiss the Petition without prejudice, and give Petitioner 30 days to file an 20 amended petition and either pay the $5.00 filing fee or file an Application to Proceed In 21 Forma Pauperis (Habeas). 22 I. Failure to Comply with Local Rule 3.5(c) 23 Rule 3.5(c) of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure requires that “[i]f a habeas corpus 24 petitioner desires to prosecute the petition in forma pauperis, the petitioner shall file an 25 application to proceed in forma pauperis on a form approved by the Court, accompanied 26 by a certification of the warden or other appropriate officer of the institution in which the 27 petitioner is confined as to the amount of money or securities on deposit to the petitioner’s 28 1 credit.” Rule 3.5(c) also requires payment of the $5.00 filing fee if a petitioner has in 2 excess of $25.00 in his inmate account. 3 Because Petitioner has not paid the $5.00 filing fee or filed an Application to 4 Proceed In Forma Pauperis, Petitioner will be given 30 days from the date this Order is 5 filed to either pay the $5.00 filing fee or file a complete Application to Proceed In Forma 6 Pauperis using the form included with this Order. 7 II. Petition Not on Court-Approved Form 8 Pursuant to Rule 3.5(a) of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure, Petitioner is required 9 to use a court-approved form when he files a pro se petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. 10 While the Court may, in its discretion, forgo the requirement that a petitioner use a court- 11 approved form, the Court will not do so here because the Petition does not substantially 12 comply with the court-approved form. The Court will dismiss the Petition without 13 prejudice and with leave to file an amended petition within 30 days. 14 III. Motion for Stay 15 Petitioner seeks a stay of this case pending exhaustion of his state remedies. 16 However, while there is authority supporting the Court’s ability to stay a fully unexhausted 17 petition, Mena v. Long, 813 F.3d 907 (9th Cir. 2016), Petitioner does not describe his state 18 court proceedings in enough detail to allow either Respondent or the Court to meaningfully 19 address this issue. Accordingly, the Court will deny the Motion to Stay without prejudice 20 and with leave to refile. If Petitioner files another motion for stay, he must include 21 information concerning the nature and current status of any pending appeals, petitions for 22 post-conviction relief, or petitions for review. 23 IV. Leave to Amend 24 Within 30 days, Petitioner may submit an amended petition on the court-approved 25 form. The Clerk of Court will mail Petitioner a court-approved form to use for filing a 26 § 2254 Petition. If Petitioner fails to use the court-approved form, the Court may strike the 27 amended petition and dismiss this action without further notice to Petitioner. 28 1 If Petitioner files an amended petition, he must use the court-approved form, set 2 forth each claim in a separate ground, and specifically allege in each ground the particular 3 federal constitutional right allegedly violated, with supporting facts. For example, if 4 Petitioner claims his due process rights are violated, he must also include the federal rights 5 violated, such as the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution. 6 Likewise, if Petitioner claims his right to effective assistance of counsel was violated, he 7 must also include the federal right violated, such as the Sixth Amendment of the United 8 States Constitution. 9 In addition, a petitioner for habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 must name 10 the state officer having custody of him as the respondent to the petition. See Rule 2(a), 11 Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases; Belgarde v. Montana, 123 F.3d 1210, 1212 (9th Cir. 12 1997). Typically, this person is the warden of the institution where the petitioner is 13 incarcerated. When a habeas petitioner has failed to name a respondent who has the power 14 to order the petitioner’s release, the Court “may not grant effective relief, and thus should 15 not hear the case unless the petition is amended to name a respondent who can grant the 16 desired relief.” Smith v. Idaho, 392 F.3d 350, 355 n.3 (9th Cir. 2004). 17 The amended petition must be retyped or rewritten in its entirety on the court- 18 approved form and may not incorporate any part of the original Petition by reference. Any 19 amended petition submitted by Petitioner should be clearly designated as such on the face 20 of the document. 21 An amended petition supersedes the original Petition. Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 22 1258, 1262 (9th Cir. 1992); Hal Roach Studios v. Richard Feiner & Co., Inc., 896 F.2d 23 1542, 1546 (9th Cir. 1990). After amendment, the original pleading is treated as 24 nonexistent. Ferdik, 963 F.2d at 1262. Any ground for relief that was raised in the original 25 Petition and that was voluntarily dismissed or was dismissed without prejudice is waived 26 if it is not alleged in an amended petition. Lacey v. Maricopa County, 693 F.3d 896, 928 27 (9th Cir. 2012) (en banc). 28 . . . . 1 V. Warnings 2 A. Address Changes 3 Petitioner must file and serve a notice of a change of address in accordance with 4 Rule 83.3(d) of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure. Petitioner must not include a motion 5 for other relief with a notice of change of address. Failure to comply may result in dismissal 6 of this action. 7 B. Possible Dismissal 8 If Petitioner fails to timely comply with every provision of this Order, including 9 these warnings, the Court may dismiss this action without further notice. See Ferdik, 963 10 F.2d at 1260-61 (a district court may dismiss an action for failure to comply with any order 11 of the Court). 12 IT IS ORDERED: 13 (1) Petitioner’s “Protective (28 U.S.C. § 2254) Habeas Corpus Petition” (Doc. 14 1) is construed as a Motion for Stay and Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 15 U.S.C. §2254. The Motion for Stay is denied without prejudice and with leave to refile. 16 The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is dismissed without prejudice and with leave to 17 amend. 18 (2) Petitioner has 30 days from the date this Order is filed to file an amended 19 petition.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Ramon L. Smith v. State of Idaho
392 F.3d 350 (Ninth Circuit, 2004)
Michael Lacey v. Joseph Arpaio
693 F.3d 896 (Ninth Circuit, 2012)
Armando Mena v. David Long
813 F.3d 907 (Ninth Circuit, 2016)
Belgarde v. Montana
123 F.3d 1210 (Ninth Circuit, 1997)
McMahon v. Shearson/American Express, Inc.
896 F.2d 17 (Second Circuit, 1990)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Fierro v. Arizona, State of, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fierro-v-arizona-state-of-azd-2022.