Bunn v. Soto

Full title: GARY L. BUNN, Petitioner, v. SOTO, Respondent.

Court: United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California

Date published: Sep 1, 2015

2:15-cv-1732 CKD P (E.D. Cal. Sep. 1, 2015)

Opinion

GARY L. BUNN, Petitioner, v. SOTO, Respondent. No. 2:15-cv-1732 CKD P United States District Court, E.D. California. September 1, 2015

          ORDER

          CAROLYN K. DELANEY, Magistrate Judge.

         Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. He has filed a request for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and has consented to have all matters in this action before a United States Magistrate Judge. See 28 U.S.C. § 636.

         Examination of the in forma pauperis application reveals that petitioner is unable to afford the costs of suit. Accordingly, the application to proceed in forma pauperis will be granted. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a).

         Under Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, the court is required to conduct a preliminary review of all petitions for writ of habeas corpus filed by state prisoners. The court must summarily dismiss a petition if it "plainly appears... that the petitioner is not entitled to relief..." The court has conducted the review required under Rule 4.

         It appears that in 2013, petitioner was transferred to segregated housing at Pelican Bay State Prison as punishment for committing the offense of indecent exposure while in prison. Petitioner asserts the sentence he was forced to serve was too long. He was released from segregated housing in June of 2014 and now resides at California State Prison, Los Angeles County.

         The court can only entertain an application for writ of habeas corpus by a state prisoner on the ground that he or she is in custody in violation of federal law. 28 U.S.C. § 2254(a). Because petitioner fails to allege that he is presently in custody in violation of federal law, or that the length of his sentence violates federal law, a writ of habeas corpus cannot issue and his habeas petition will be summarily dismissed.

         In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

         1. Petitioner's request for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 5) is granted;

         2. Petitioner's petition for a writ of habeas corpus is summarily dismissed;

         3. This case is closed; and

         4. The court declines to issue the certificate of appealability referenced in 28 U.S.C. § 2253.