(HC) Van den Heuvel v. El Dorado Prison Holding Facility South Lake Tahoe

Opinion

JOHN MARK VAN DEN HEUVEL, No. 2:22-CV-0231-TLN-DMC-P Petitioner, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS v. FACILITY SOUTH LAKE TAHOE, Respondent.

Petitioner, a parolee proceeding pro se, brings this petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Pending before the Court are Petitioner’s motions for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, ECF Nos. 7, 13, 14. Petitioner has not submitted an affidavit required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) showing that Petitioner is unable to prepay fees and costs or give security therefor. To the contrary, the affidavits submitted by Petitioner indicate that Petitioner is employed and earns $1,385.00 per month in gross wages. See e.g. ECF No. 7, pg. 1. It thus appears that Petitioner is able to pre-pay the $5.00 filing fee for this habeas action. / / / / / / / / / / / / Based on the foregoing, the undersigned recommends that Petitioner’s motions, Nos. 7, 13, 14, for leave to proceed in forma pauperis be denied and that this action be dismissed without prejudice to re-filing upon prepayment of fees therefor. These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(). Within 14 days after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written objections with the Court. Responses to objections shall be filed within 14 days after service of objections. Failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal. See Martinez v. Yist, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). Dated: April 26, 2022 Ssvcqo_ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE