Pittman v. Cooley

E.D. Louisiana

Pittman v. Cooley

DecidedJune 21, 2023

Docket2:23-cv-02071

StatusUnknown

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

Bluebook

Pittman v. Cooley, (E.D. La. 2023).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

BRIAN HENRY PITTMAN CIVIL ACTION

VERSUS NO. 23-2071

KEITH COOLEY, WARDEN SECTION “J” (2)

ORDER AND REASONS

Petitioner Brian Henry Pittman filed a petition for issuance of writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging his 2018 St. Tammany Parish conviction for aggravated battery, attempted armed robbery, and simple burglary.1 Pittman originally presented his petition to the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana, and a Magistrate Judge in that court granted pauper status on June 12, 2023.2 On that same day, the Magistrate Judge transferred the case to this Eastern District of Louisiana and directed that pauper status be deferred to this court for ruling despite that judge’s prior grant of pauper status.3 Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1), a federal court “may authorize the commencement, prosecution or defense of any suit, action or proceeding, civil or criminal, or appeal therein, without prepayment of fees or security therefor, by a person who submits an affidavit that includes a statement of all assets such prisoner possesses that the person is unable to pay such fees or give security therefor” (emphasis added). In addition, “[b]ecause in forma pauperis status is a privilege, it follows that the privilege may be revoked when the goals of section 1915 are not being furthered.”4

1 ECF No. 1, at 1. 2 ECF No. 5. 3 ECF No. 6. 4 Murphy v. Jones, 801 F. Supp. 283, 288 (E.D. Mo. 1992). A review of Pittman’s motion to proceed as a pauper reflects that he is not entitled to proceed as a pauper.° The certification of Pittman’s inmate account balances reflects that he has $4.79 in his drawing account and $14.00 in his savings account, totaling $18.79 available to him.°® Pittman, therefore, has sufficient funds to pay the $5.00 filing fee and is not entitled to proceed as pauper. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Brian Henry Pittman’s pauper status is hereby REVOKED and leave to proceed as a pauper DENIED. The matter is to be CLOSED for administrative and statistical purposes until such time as Pittman pays the $5.00 filing fee. New Orleans, Louisiana this _20th_ day of June, 2023.

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

> ECF No. 4. ° Id. at 6.

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

BRIAN HENRY PITTMAN CIVIL ACTION

VERSUS NO. 23-2071

KEITH COOLEY, WARDEN SECTION “J” (2)

ORDER AND REASONS

Petitioner Brian Henry Pittman filed a petition for issuance of writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging his 2018 St. Tammany Parish conviction for aggravated battery, attempted armed robbery, and simple burglary.1 Pittman originally presented his petition to the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana, and a Magistrate Judge in that court granted pauper status on June 12, 2023.2 On that same day, the Magistrate Judge transferred the case to this Eastern District of Louisiana and directed that pauper status be deferred to this court for ruling despite that judge’s prior grant of pauper status.3 Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1), a federal court “may authorize the commencement, prosecution or defense of any suit, action or proceeding, civil or criminal, or appeal therein, without prepayment of fees or security therefor, by a person who submits an affidavit that includes a statement of all assets such prisoner possesses that the person is unable to pay such fees or give security therefor” (emphasis added). In addition, “[b]ecause in forma pauperis status is a privilege, it follows that the privilege may be revoked when the goals of section 1915 are not being furthered.”4

1 ECF No. 1, at 1. 2 ECF No. 5. 3 ECF No. 6. 4 Murphy v. Jones, 801 F. Supp. 283, 288 (E.D. Mo. 1992). A review of Pittman’s motion to proceed as a pauper reflects that he is not entitled to proceed as a pauper.° The certification of Pittman’s inmate account balances reflects that he has $4.79 in his drawing account and $14.00 in his savings account, totaling $18.79 available to him.°® Pittman, therefore, has sufficient funds to pay the $5.00 filing fee and is not entitled to proceed as pauper. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Brian Henry Pittman’s pauper status is hereby REVOKED and leave to proceed as a pauper DENIED. The matter is to be CLOSED for administrative and statistical purposes until such time as Pittman pays the $5.00 filing fee. New Orleans, Louisiana this _20th_ day of June, 2023.

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

> ECF No. 4. ° Id. at 6.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Pittman v. Cooley, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pittman-v-cooley-laed-2023.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack