(HC) Payne v. Virga, No. 2:2010cv03016 - Document 10 (E.D. Cal. 2011)

Court Description: ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 1/31/2011 ORDERING that ptnr's application to proceed ifp is GRANTED; the 7 findings and recommendations are VACATED; the petition is DISMISSED and ptnr has 21 days to file an amended petition, no extensions of time will be granted. (Yin, K)

Download PDF
(HC) Payne v. Virga Doc. 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 GERALD J. PAYNE 11 12 Petitioner, No. CIV S-10-3016 GEB GGH vs. 13 TIMOTHY VIRGA 14 ORDER Respondents. 15 16 / Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a petition for a writ of 17 habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, together with an application to proceed in forma 18 pauperis. Examination of the in forma pauperis application reveals that petitioner is unable to 19 afford the costs of suit. Accordingly, the application to proceed in forma pauperis will be 20 granted. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). 21 On December 8, 2010, the undersigned issued findings and recommendations that 22 this case be dismissed as petitioner was only seeking habeas relief for a 90 day suspension of 23 visiting privileges for a prison disciplinary finding. 24 25 26 On December 14, 2010, petitioner filed objections and indicated for the first time that he was also placed in the SHU for a year. On December 21, 2010, petitioner filed additional objections, and indicated for 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 the first time that he was assessed a 150 days loss of credits as a result of the disciplinary finding. 2 In addition, petitioner does not raise any actual claims in the petition, instead he 3 wishes the court to obtain a videotape that may or may not reveal he is innocent of the charges. 4 While petitioner can raise a discovery request at the suitable time, this does not present a viable 5 claim for habeas relief. 6 As petitioner was assessed a loss of credits, he may seek habeas relief, however, 7 petitioner has still failed to provide a suitable petition, instead submitting piecemeal filings. The 8 December 8, 2010, order and findings and recommendations (Doc. 7) are vacated. Petitioner’s 9 petition is dismissed with leave to file an amended petition within 21 days of service of this 10 order, no extensions will be granted. Petitioner must present all of his facts in one filing and 11 present a viable claim. The court will not refer to multiple filings nor is it clear why petitioner 12 did not present his case in the original petition. 13 Petitioner is informed that pursuant to the Local Rules, “every pleading to which 14 an amendment or supplement is permitted as a matter of right or has been allowed by Court order 15 shall be retyped and filed so that it is complete in itself without reference to the prior or 16 superseded pleading.” L.R. 220. This is because, as a general rule, an amended complaint 17 supersedes an earlier complaint. See Loux v. Rhay, 375 F.2d 55, 57 (9th Cir.1967). 18 In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 19 1. Petitioner’s application to proceed in forma pauperis is granted; 20 2. The December 8, 2010, order and findings and recommendations (Doc. 7) are 21 22 vacated; 3. The petition is dismissed and petitioner is granted leave to file an amended 23 petition within 21 days of service of this order, no extensions will be granted. 24 DATED: January 31, 2011 /s/ Gregory G. Hollows 25 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 26 GGH: AB - payn3016.vac 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.