Roberts v. United States District Court for the Northern District of California
Cases that cite this one
215 later published cases cite this decision. The 25 that cite it most often are listed here.
- Devine Ex Rel. Devine v. Indian River County School Board (11th Cir. 1997)
- Nancy S. Bradshaw, Individually and on Behalf of Others Similarly Situated v. Zoological Society of San Diego (9th Cir. 1981)
- Jenkins v. United States (D.C. 1988)
- John Caceres D/B/A Caceres Agency v. International Air Transport Association (2d Cir. 1970)
- Henry v. City of Detroit Manpower Department (6th Cir. 1984)
- Grant v. Blaine (Pa. 2005)
- Ficken, Ivan v. Alvarez, Aida (D.C. Cir. 1998)
- Robert Collinsgru Maura Collinsgru, on Behalf of Their Son, Francis Collinsgru v. Palmyra Board of Education (3d Cir. 1998)
- Hammond v. Weekes (D.C. 1993)
- Lopez House v. Scott Belford (7th Cir. 1992)
- Robert Holt v. J. Paul Ford, Warden (11th Cir. 1989)
- Earl Jason Lariscey v. The United States (Fed. Cir. 1988)
- Michael F. Armstrong v. Clovis McAlpin (2d Cir. 1980)
- Kathleen Hackett, on Behalf of Herself and All Others Similarly Situated v. General Host Corporation (3d Cir. 1972)
- William T. X. Fulwood v. Donald Clemmer, Director, District of Columbia Department of Corrections (D.C. Cir. 1961)
- United States v. George Johnson (2d Cir. 1956)
- Fuller v. Myers (10th Cir. 2005)
- Darryl McGore v. Gene L. Wrigglesworth, Chief Sheriff Richard Chinelli, Administrator Ingham County Sheriff's Department (6th Cir. 1997)
- Andrews v. King (9th Cir. 2005)
- In re: Dow Corning Corporation (2d Cir. 2001)
- Robert Holt v. J. Paul Ford, Warden (11th Cir. 1987)
- Mitchell v. Forsyth (Supreme Court of the United States 1985)
- Parrott v. State (Md. 1984)
- Rederi A/B Disa v. Cunard Steamship Co., Ltd. (Supreme Court of the United States 1967)
- Saunders v. Diamond Pharmacy Services (District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania 2023)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion
Petitioner, who is confined in a California state prison, sought to file a petition in forma pauperis for a writ of injunction in the District Court below. That court denied leave to proceed in forma pauperis, holding that petitioner was not entitled to the benefits of 28 U. S. C. § 1915 because he was no longer a “citizen” as required by that section. The District Court reached that decision in reliance on California Penal Code § 2600, which provides that one sentenced to imprisonment for a term *845 of years is deprived of his civil rights for the period of imprisonment. The decision of the District Court is in error. Citizenship for the purpose of in forma pauperis proceedings in the federal courts is solely a matter of federal law. Congress has not specified criminal convictions, except for desertion and treason, as grounds for loss of citizenship. 8 U. S. C. § 801.
Petitioner thereafter filed a motion in the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit for allowance of an appeal from the order of the District Court. The denial by a District Judge of a motion to proceed in forma pauperis is an appealable order. 28 U. S. C. § 1291; see Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp., 337 U. S. 541 (1949). The Court of Appeals, however, held that it had “no power to grant an application for allowance of an appeal,” and dismissed the petition.
Finally, petitioner filed in this Court a motion for leave to file a petition for a writ of mandamus to the District Court. Mandamus is an extraordinary remedy, available only in rare cases. Ex parte Collett, 337 U. S. 55, 72 (1949), and cases there cited. Because of the ambiguous state of this record, and the fact that a denial of this motion will not prejudice petitioner in further attempts to proceed in forma pauperis, the motion must be denied.
It is so ordered.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.