(HC) Bolanos v. Corveloo

• Court: District Court, E.D. California
• Decided: July 7, 2025
• Docket: 1:25-cv-00585
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10

11 CARLOS ALFONSO BOLANOS, Case No. 1:25-cv-00585-KES-EPG-HC

12 Petitioner, ORDER GRANTING PETITIONER LEAVE TO AMEND 13 v. ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT 14 PATRICK CORVELOO, TO SEND PETITIONER BLANK § 2254 15 Respondent. FORMS

16 17 Petitioner Carlos Alfonso Bolanos is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for 18 writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. 19 I. 20 DISCUSSION 21 The Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases (“Habeas Rules”) require preliminary review 22 of a habeas petition and allow a district court to dismiss a petition before the respondent is 23 ordered to file a response, if it “plainly appears from the petition and any attached exhibits that 24 the petitioner is not entitled to relief in the district court.” Rule 4, Rules Governing Section 2254 25 Cases in the United States District Courts, 28 U.S.C. foll. § 2254. 26 Habeas Rule 2(c) states that a petition must “(1) specify all the grounds for relief 27 available to the petitioner; [and] (2) state the facts supporting each ground.” Petitioner must state his claims with sufficient specificity. See McFarland v. Scott, 512 U.S. 849, 856 (1994); 1 | Hendricks v. Vasquez, 908 F.2d 490, 491-92 (9th Cir. 1990). “A prime purpose of Rule 2(c)’s 2 | demand that habeas petitioners plead with particularity is to assist the district court in 3 | determining whether the State should be ordered to ‘show cause why the writ should not be 4 | granted.’” Mayle v. Felix, 545 U.S. 644, 656 (2005) (quoting 28 U.S.C. § 2243). 5 Here, the instant petition does not set forth any grounds for relief or factual allegations. It 6 | is essentially a blank petition and therefore should be dismissed. However, a petition for habeas 7 | corpus should not be dismissed without leave to amend unless it appears that no tenable claim for 8 | relief can be pleaded were such leave granted. Jarvis v. Nelson, 440 F.2d 13, 14 (9th Cir. 1971). 9 | Therefore, the Court will grant Petitioner an opportunity to file an amended petition. 10 II. 11 ORDER 12 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 13 1. Petitioner is GRANTED leave to file a first amended petition within THIRTY (30) days 14 of the date of service of this order; and 15 2. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to send Petitioner blank § 2254 habeas forms. 16 7 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: _ July 7, 2025 [sf hy — 19 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28