Reginald Blount v. Schultz

United States District Court for the Eastern District of California

Reginald Blount v. Schultz

Trial Court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 REGINALD BLOUNT, No. 2:25-cv-2179-DAD-CKD P 12 Petitioner, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 SCHULTZ, 15 Respondent. 16

17 18 Petitioner, a state prisoner, filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus challenging his 2012 19 conviction in the Sacramento Superior Court and asserting his sentence is unauthorized based on 20 Senate Bill 1393. (See ECF No. 1 at 5.) A filing fee of $5.00 is required to commence a habeas 21 corpus action in federal district court.

28 U.S.C. § 1914

(a). The court may authorize the 22 commencement of an action “without prepayment of fees and costs or security therefor, by a 23 person who makes affidavit that he is unable to pay such costs or give security therefor.” 28

24 U.S.C. § 1915

(a). 25 By order filed on August 8, 2025, petitioner was ordered to submit an affidavit in support 26 of his request to proceed in forma pauperis or the appropriate filing fee. Petitioner was cautioned 27 that failure to do so would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. The time 28 granted for that purpose has expired and petitioner has not paid the fee, filed an application to 1 | proceed without prepayment of fees, or otherwise responded to the court’s order regarding the 2 || need to pay the fee or file the application to proceed without prepayment of fee. 3 Accordingly, IT IS RECOMMENDED this action be dismissed without prejudice. 4 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 5 || assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of

28 U.S.C. § 636

(b)(1). Within 14 days after 6 || being served with these findings and recommendations, petitioner may file written objections 7 || with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 8 | “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Petitioner is advised that 9 || failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District 10 || Court’s order. Martinez v. YIst,

951 F.2d 1153

(9th Cir. 1991). 11 | Dated: September 23, 2025 / aa / a Ly a

13 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 14 8, blou2179.fifp 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Reference

Status
Unknown