Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword
Like this
4Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Richard Fine 9th Circuit Request For Certificate of Appealability & Immediate Release

Richard Fine 9th Circuit Request For Certificate of Appealability & Immediate Release

Ratings: (0)|Views: 410 |Likes:
Published by Leslie Dutton

More info:

Published by: Leslie Dutton on Jul 28, 2009
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

05/11/2014

pdf

text

original

 
R E (7 E ', M e D
MOLLM c Dwvihfx cunx
U,s. COIFITOFA/PEALS
JUL 2 2 2922
FILED
DQCKEWDDATE INITIAL
RICHARD 1. Flcs In Pro Per
Prisoner ID # 1824367
c/o Men's Central Jail
441 Bauchet Street
Los Angeles, CA 90012
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
RIC 1. FINE,Appellant and Petitioner,
VS.
Case No. 09-56073
REQUEST FOR CERTIFICATE OFAPPEALABILIT ,RZQLTEST FOR
ORDER IMMEDIATELYGMNTING WRIT OF HABEAS
CORPUS ON ALL SEVEN
GROUNDS BASED UPON NOOPPOSITION MD VIOLATION
OF 28 USC j 2243 BY DISTMCTCOURT, Ar REQUEST FQR
ORDER IMYDIATELY
SETTWG APPELLANT FREE
FROM LOS ANGELES COUNTY
JAILU.S. DISTRICT COURT,Appellee and Respondent.
SIIERIFF OF LOS ANGELESCOUNTY
(Real Party ln Interest)
Case: 09-56073 07/23/2009 Page: 1 of 12 DktEntry: 7003921
 
:
l 'Is y' s
2
3
1. equest for ertiflcate of ppealabili ........... rror! ookmark not deflned.
4
5 1I. equest for rder lmmediately ranting rit of abeas o us on 11 7
rounds ased pon o pposition and iolation of 28 S j 2243 ............ 2
111. equest for rder lmmediately Setting Fine Free From 1, oun Jail .......... 7
z89
10I
u
F IES
11
2 CASES
13 Aetna L 1* e Insurance Co
.
v. L avoie
14Caperton, et al, v. W. F. assey Coal Co., et. al,
1 5 5 ti ti l-J S; - (11 () () 6))N (IC (:1* (lkl 1 t$/ 8 /1) 6) .......................................-............................................ I?N 8
In Re urchisonrTumey v. Ohio7 >
18
19
20 STATUTES
21
22(2 Etllt-tlllAlét l3us1-ne s ?lr 13r() lre s1-()11s (2 ) (lkl j t; 1 ;! 6
......................................................................
8
23 p uj. p g a q .
x
tl x1C AMUII IIIICCC x- () w.II ................................*............................**...*.....@..@@..œ..........**.***.@.@*.***.*.** x'
24
2 6 (2 tli rtllnl1- Et E; enate B111 ''S l%X2 1 1 '' ......................................................... 827 IJ S (rtlrlstittlti ()l'l lRirst ellclrllel'l. ....................................................... ....................................6. ,
28
'
-
11- '
Case: 09-56073 07/23/2009 Page: 2 of 12 DktEntry: 7003921
 
1
2 1. Request for Pertificate of Appealability
3 Appellant (hereinafter ççFine'') filed a Request for Certificate of
4 Appealability on July 1, 2009, in the US District Court. As of the present time,5 the US District Court has done nothing in response other than file the Request as6 a ççNotice of Appeal''
7 Given the history of the US District Court of violating statutes in this case,
8 is doubtful that the US District Court will act on the Request.
9 Fine respectfully requests that thls Court immediately issue the Certificate
10 of Appealability.
11 If this Court does not immediately act, this case will be unnecessarily
12 prolonged as has already occurred by this Court's failure to promptly act in case
13 09-71692.
14 In such case, Fine filed an Emergency Petition for Writ of Habeas Copus
15 in this Court alleging that the US District Court violated 28 USC j 2243. The
16 District Court refused to tile the Petition. This Court filed it as a Petition for17 Writ of Mandate/prohibition on June 3, 2009. This Petition was separate from
18 the Petition in USDC case no. 90-CV-1914 (Docket #1) as the new Petition
19 alleged violations of the District Court. The Petition in USDC case no. 09-CV-20 1914 alleged violations by Judge Yaffe and the LA Superior Court in a contempt21 action, resulting in the incarceration of Fine to tdcoerce'' him to respond to22 questions about his assets. Fine challenged Judge Yaffe's right to preside at the
23 contempt trial and judge his own actions, amongst other things.
24 In case no. 09-71692, this Court delayed its decision until June 30, 2009,
25 which was the day after the District Court approved the Magistrate Judge's
26 Report and Recommendation (ttRepolfi) over Fine's Objections (Docket #30).
27 This Court mistakenly refen-ed to the Magistrate Judge's Report dated June 18,
28 2009 (Docket #25) as the decision of the District Court. This Court never
Case: 09-56073 07/23/2009 Page: 3 of 12 DktEntry: 7003921

Activity (4)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 thousand reads
1 hundred reads
Jenny Cordero liked this
apatriot liked this

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->