Rencher v. Garrett

Opinion

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3 EDDIE RENCHER, JR., Case No.: 2:22-cv-00704-JAD-VCF

4 Petitioner Order Directing Petitioner to File 5 v. Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis

6 GARRETT, et al.,

7 Respondents

8 9 Petitioner Eddie Rencher, Jr. has submitted a pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus 10 under 28 U.S.C. § 22541 without submitting an application to proceed in forma pauperis2 or 11 paying the filing fee. The court gives Rencher 30 days to either pay the $5.00 filing fee or file an 12 application to proceed in forma pauperis on this court’s form, with a completed financial 13 certificate and inmate account statements for the past six months. If Rencher fails to either pay 14 the fee or submit the in forma pauperis application, the court will dismiss this action as 15 improperly commenced.3 16 I also note that Rencher indicates on the face of his petition that it is second and 17 successive to his earlier petition in Rencher v. Williams, et al.4 In March of 2017, United States 18 District Judge Andrew Gordon denied that petition on its merits and denied a certificate of 19

20 1 ECF No. 1-1. 21 2 While Rencher submitted a motion for leave to appeal in forma pauperis, ECF No. 1-1, he is not seeking to file an appeal. He also did not file the required application to proceed in forma 22 pauperis by an inmate under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 on the court’s correct form, and he did not include the completed and signed financial certificate or inmate accounts for the past six months. 23 3 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2) and Local Rule LSR 1-2. 4 2:12-cv-01258 (D.Nev. March 31, 2017). 1|| appealability.> Rencher appealed, and the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit 2|| denied a certificate of appealability.° “Before a second or successive application . . . is filed in the district court, the applicant shall move in the appropriate court of appeals for an order 4|| authorizing the district court to consider the application.”’ If a petition has been dismissed with 5|| prejudice as untimely or because of procedural default, the dismissal constitutes a disposition on 6|| the merits and renders a subsequent petition second or successive for purposes of § 2244(b).* 7|| Rencher indicates that he has not sought authorization by the Ninth Circuit.’ Thus this petition 8]| may also ultimately be subject to dismissal as second and successive. 9 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Rencher has until August 4, 2022, to either pay the $5.00 filing fee or file an application to proceed in forma pauperis on this court’s form, with a 11||completed financial certificate and inmate account statements for the past six months. If he fails to either pay the filing fee or file an application to proceed in forma pauperis, the court will 13]| dismiss this case without prejudice. 14 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court is directed to retain the petition 15]| but not file it at this time. roa USS. District JudgeJenniferA. Dorse 17 July 4, 202 18 19 Zd. at ECF No. 63. 6 Id. at ECF Nos. 65, 66. 728 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A). McNabb vy. Yates, 576 F.3d 1028, 1029-1030 (9th Cir. 2009); Henderson v. Lampert, 396 F.3d 33 1049, 1053 (9th Cir. 2005). ECF No. 1-1 at 2.