Transfiguracion v. State of Hawaii
| Faustino M. Transfiguracion |
| State of Hawaii |
| Shelley Harrington and Laurie Nadamoto |
| 1:2022cv00027 |
| January 10, 2022 |
| US District Court for the District of Hawaii |
| ROM TRADER |
| DERRICK K WATSON |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State) |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 24, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 12 TRANSMITTAL of DOCUMENTS from the Supreme Court, State of Hawaii: 1) Letter from Faustino Transfiguracion to Janice T. Matsumoto Re: Request for Interpreter, 2) Letters to Faustino Transfiguracion from Clerk's Office dated December 9, 2016 and February 24, 2017, 3) Request for 28 U.S.C. 2254 for Writ of Habeas Corpus form. Pursuant to the request, the Clerk's Office mailed a blank 28 U.S.C. 2254 form to Mr. Transfiguracion on February 24, 2022. (Attachments: #1 Mailing Documentation from Supreme Court, State of Hawaii) (eta) |
| Filing 11 CLERK'S JUDGMENT entered on 2/23/2022 pursuant to ECF No. 10 . (eta) |
| Filing 10 EO: A district court may dismiss sua sponte an action for failure to comply with court rules or orders or to prosecute the action. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 63031 (1962); Hells Canyon Pres. Council v. U.S. Forest Serv., 403 F.3d 683, 689 (9th Cir. 2005). In determining whether dismissal is appropriate, district courts consider the following five factors: (1) the public's interest in expeditious resolution of litigation; (2) the court's need to manage its docket; (3) the risk of prejudice to the defendants; (4) the public policy favoring disposition of cases on their merits; and (5) the availability of less drastic sanctions. Applied Underwriters, Inc. v. Lichtenegger, 913 F.3d 884, 890 (9th Cir. 2019). On January 14, 2022, the Court mailed to Petitioner an Order Denying Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis by a Prisoner [ECF No. 4]. Petitioner had until February 14, 2022, to pay the filing fee or to file a complete application to proceed in forma pauperis ("IFP application"). The Court warned Petitioner that any failure to pay the filing fee or to submit a complete IFP application would result in dismissal of this action [ECF No. 4]. The February 14, 2022 deadline has passed, and Petitioner has not paid the filing fee or submitted a complete IFP application. To the extent the Court received various letters from Petitioner [ECF Nos. 3, 5, 79], none of them appear responsive to the instructions in the January 14, 2022 Order. In view of Petitioner's failure to pay the filing fee or submit a complete IFP application, the Court finds that the relevant factors support dismissal of this action. The public's interest in expeditious resolution of this litigation strongly favors dismissal, as does the Court's need to manage its docket. See Pagtalunan v. Galaza, 291 F.3d 639, 642 (9th Cir. 2002). Moreover, there is no risk of prejudice to Respondent. Finally, there are currently no less drastic alternatives available. The Court recognizes that the public policy favoring disposition of cases on their merits weighs against dismissal. Nevertheless, considering the totality of the circumstances and because the other factors favor dismissal, this factor is outweighed.Should Petitioner wish to pursue any of the claims asserted in this action, he must do so by initiating a new action, which, among other things, would require either paying the filing fee or submitting a complete IFP application.This action is DISMISSED without prejudice. The Clerk is DIRECTED to enter judgment and close the file. IT IS SO ORDERED. (JUDGE DERRICK K. WATSON)(tyk)COURTS CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE - Non-Registered CM/ECF Participants have been served by First Class Mail to the addresses of record listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). Pro Se (Non-Prisoner) Litigants that have consented to receive documents and Notices of Electronic Filings by email, have been served electronically at the e-mail address listed on the (NEF) |
| COURT'S CERTIFICATE of Service - a copy of 10 Entering Order, #11 Clerk's Judgment shall be served by First Class Mail to Faustino M. Transfiguracion at the address of record on February 24, 2022. Registered Participants of CM/ECF received the document electronically at the e-mail address listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). (eta) |
| Filing 8 Letter to Judge Derrick K. Watson from Faustino M. Transfiguracion, dated February 1, 2022 re filing fee. (Attachments: #1 Mailing Documentation) (eta) |
| Filing 7 Copy of Letter to Janice T. Matsumoto from Faustino M. Transfiguracion, dated January 26, 2022. The letter was forwarded to the U.S. District Court by the Supreme Court of the State of Hawaii. (Attachments: #1 Mailing Documentation from the Supreme Court of the State of Hawaii) (eta) |
| Filing 6 EO: On January 10, 2022 [ECF No. 3], and January 24, 2022 [ECF No. 5], the Clerk's Office received separate letters from Petitioner written in a language other than English. "It is clear, to the point of perfect transparency, that federal court proceedings must be conducted in English." United States v. Rivera-Rosario, 300 F.3d 1, 5 (1st Cir. 2002); see also Ruiz v. Gates, No. 2:19-CV-2518-KJM-DMC-P, 2021 WL 5179902, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Nov. 8, 2021) ("The Court cannot accept submissions in a language other than English."); Ruiz v. R. Mobert, No. 1:17-cv-00709-BAM (PC), 2017 WL 6886093, at *1 (E.D. Cal. July 5, 2017) ("[T]he Court cannot provide Plaintiff with translated documents, nor will it translate his documents from [another language] into English."). The court will take no action on the January 10, 2022 letter or the January 24, 2022 letter, including attempting to translate them into English. Petitioner is further NOTIFIED that all future submissions must be either in English or accompanied by an English translation. IT IS SO ORDERED. (JUDGE DERRICK K. WATSON)(tyk)COURTS CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE - Non-Registered CM/ECF Participants have been served by First Class Mail to the addresses of record listed on the (NEF). Pro Se (Non-Prisoner) Litigants that have consented to receive documents and Notices of Electronic Filings by email, have been served electronically at the e-mail address listed on the (NEF) |
| Filing 5 Letter to Ckerk Sue Beitia from Faustino Transfiguracion Re: "pilipino ilokano interpreter", dated January 14, 2022. (Attachments: #1 Mailing Documentation) (eta) |
Filing 4
ORDER DENYING APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS BY A PRISONER re #2 - Signed by JUDGE DERRICK K. WATSON on 1/14/2022. (1) Transfiguracion Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis by a Prisoner is DENIED as incomplete. (2) Transfiguracion is DIRECTED to pay the filing fee or submit a complete IFP Application on or before February 14, 2022. (3) The Clerk is DIRECTED to send Transfiguracion an Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis by a Prisoner so that he can comply with this Order. (eta)
|
| COURT'S CERTIFICATE of Service - a copy of #4 ORDER DENYING APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS BY A PRISONER has been served by First Class Mail to Faustino M. Transfiguracion at the address of record on January 14, 2022. An Application to Proceed In Pauperis by a Prisoner and instructions were included in the mail to Petitioner. Registered Participants of CM/ECF received the document electronically at the e-mail address listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). (eta) |
| Filing 3 Letter addressed to Sue Beitia, Clerk from Petitioner Faustino M. Transfiguracion, dated December 22, 2021. (eta) |
| Filing 2 APPLICATION to Proceed In Forma Pauperis by a Prisoner - by Petitioner Faustino M. Transfiguracion (eta) |
| Filing 1 PETITION Under 28 U.S.C. 2254 for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody - filed by Faustino M. Transfiguracion. (Attachments: #1 Addendum Nos. 1-25, #2 Letter and Petition for Post-Conviction Relief, Rule 40 (HRPP), SPP No. 17-1-0001K, #3 Addendum Nos. 1-16 re Rule 40 Petition, SPP No. 17-1-0001K, #4 Supplement/Request for Hearing re Petition to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Judgment, SPP No. 17-2-0001K, #5 Appeal from Judgment of Conviction and Sentence, 3PC09-1-00126K, CAAP-11-0000048, #6 Appeal from Judgment and Guilty Conviction, CR 09-1-0126K, CAAP-11-0000048, #7 Letters from Supreme Court, State of Hawaii, #8 Letter to Sue Beitia, Clerk (with attachments), dated February 21, 2017, #9 Letter dated March 11, 2014, #10 Letter re Application for Writ of Certiorari from Office of Public Defender, State of Hawaii, dated February 11, 2013, #11 Notice and Order of Fixing Minimum Term(s) of Imprisonment, #12 Transmittal from Third Circuit Court, State of Hawaii, dated May 3, 2016, #13 Order Dismissing Petition to Vacate, #14 Board Recommendation, #15 Supreme Court documents, #16 Order Dismissing Petition to Vacate, #17 Order Granting Request to Proceed in Forma Pauperis, #18 Petition for Post-Conviction Relief, SPP 16-1-003K, #19 State's Opposition to Rule 40 Petition, SPP 16-1-003K, #20 Discovery SPP 16-1-003K, #21 Letter from Third Circuit Court, dated January 12, 2017, CR 09-1-126K, #22 Petition for Post-Conviction Relief, Rule 40 HRPP, SPP No. 14-1-002K, #23 Photo, #24 Mailing Documentation)(eta) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Hawaii District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
