IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS SPRINGFIELD DIVISION
December 5, 2006
DONALD COOKSON, PETITIONER,
KEN BARTLEY, WARDEN, PICKNEYVILLE CORRECTIONAL CENTER, RESPONDENT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Richard Mills, U.S. District Judge
This case is before the Court on the Petitioner's petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. This is the initial consideration of the Petitioner's petition pursuant to Rule 4 of the Rules Governing § 2254 Cases. The Petitioner has also filed an application to proceed without prepayment of filing fees and an accompanying affidavit. After reviewing the petition, the Court finds that a summary dismissal is not warranted. Therefore pursuant to Rule 4, the Court directs the Attorney General for the State of Illinois to respond to the Petitioner's petition. The response shall discuss the merits and the procedural posture of the petition, i.e. whether the Petitioner has exhausted his state remedies and/or procedurally defaulted any of his claims. See Rule 5 of the Rules Governing § 2254 cases.
The Petitioner has also filed an application and affidavit to proceed without prepayment of fees. He states that he receives $10.00 a month from the institution where he is incarcerated. According to the Petitioner's trust fund statement, he had only .27 in his account on August 30, 2006. However, the docket indicates that the Petitioner has already paid his $5.00 filing fee.
Ergo, the Attorney General for the State of Illinois is ORDERED to file by January 31, 2007 an answer, pursuant to Rule 5 of the Rules Governing 28 U.S.C. § 2254 cases, to the Petitioner's petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The Petitioner's application to proceed without the prepayment of fees is DENIED AS MOOT.
ENTER: December 5, 2006
Richard Mills United States District Judge
© 1992-2006 VersusLaw Inc.