IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
May 22, 2006
ARLINDA JOHNS, PETITIONER / DEFENDANT,
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, RESPONDENT / PLAINTIFF.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: J. Phil Gilbert U.S. District Judge
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Before the Court is a motion to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal, filed by the Arlinda Johns.
On March 29, 2006 this Court denied Johns' motion seeking relief under Section 2255. (Doc. 13). On April 20, 2006, Johns filed a notice of appeal. (Doc. 15). Now, Johns has filed a motion to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal (Doc. 20). Johns, however, has not filed a statement of the issues that she intends to pursue on appeal as required by Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 24(a)(1)(C).
A federal court may permit a party to proceed on appeal without full pre-payment of fees provided the party is indigent and the appeal is taken in good faith. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3); Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(3). A frivolous appeal cannot be made in good faith. Lee v. Clinton, 209 F.3d 1025, 1026-27 (7th Cir. 2000). The test for determining if an appeal is in good faith or not frivolous is whether any of the legal points are reasonably arguable on their merits. Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989) (citing Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967)); Walker v. O'Brien, 216 F.3d 626, 632 (7th Cir. 2000). As Johns has failed to include a statement of the issues she intends to present to the appellate court, this Court cannot determine whether her appeal is frivolous. Therefore, the Court orders Johns to file a statement of the issue she intends to present to the appellate court within 30 days of the entry of this order. If she fails to make this filing the Court will deny her motion and certify that she has not taken her appeal in good faith.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2006 VersusLaw Inc.