(HC) Blakesley v. Fisher

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA MARK DANIEL BLAKESLEY, No. 2:20-cv-0567 AC P 12 Petitioner, 13 v. ORDER RAYTHEL FISHER, Warden, 15 Respondent.1 17 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner has not, however, filed an in forma pauperis affidavit or paid the required filing fee ($5.00). See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914(a); 1915(a). Petitioner will be provided the opportunity to either submit the appropriate affidavit in support of a request to proceed in forma pauperis or submit the appropriate filing fee.

22 In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 23 1. Petitioner shall submit, within thirty days from the date of this order, an affidavit in support of his request to proceed in forma pauperis or the appropriate filing fee; petitioner’s A federal petition for writ of habeas corpus must name as respondent the state officer having custody of the petitioner. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254; Rule 2(a) of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts; Smith v. Idaho, 392 F.3d 350, 354-55 (9th Cir. 2004); Stanley v. California Supreme Court, 21 F.3d 359, 360 (9th Cir. 1994). Accordingly, Raythel Fisher, Warden of Valley State Prison, is substituted for the Sacramento County Superior Court as respondent herein.

1 | failure to comply with this order will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed; || and 3 2. The Clerk of the Court is directed to send petitioner a copy of the in forma pauperis | form used by this district.

5 | DATED: March 19, 2020 ~ 6 Attten— Lhar—e_ ALLISON CLAIRE 7 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE