Legal Opinion

(HC)Singh v. Pfeiffer

District Court, E.D. California

Decided October 14, 2021No. 2:21-cv-01731Unknown

1Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 RAGHVENDRA SINGH, Case No. 2:21-cv-01731-JDP (HC) 12 Petitioner, ORDER: 13 v. (1) GRANTING PETITIONER’S APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA 14 C. PFEIFFER, PAUPERIS; 15 Respondent. (2) FINDING THAT THE PETITION DOES NOT STATE A COGNIZABLE CLAIM AND 16 GRANTING LEAVE TO AMEND WITHIN SIXTY DAYS 17 ECF Nos. 1 & 2 18 19 Petitioner, proceeding without counsel, seeks a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. 20 § 2254. After reviewing the petition, I find that the petition cannot proceed because: (1) it 21 appears…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Danny BOYD, Petitioner-Appellant, v. S. Frank THOMPSON, Superintendent of the Oregon State Penitentiary, Respondent-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1998
  2. Martin Valdez, Jr. v. W. MontgomeryCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2019
  3. Espinoza v. MontgomeryDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2015

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API