Cruz v. Ortiz
- Haywood Gilliam
- 4:20-cv-00176
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Cruz v. Ortiz, Judge Gilliam denied counsel and appeal fee-waiver requests, but granted Cruz’s request for a complaint copy.
Guillermo Trujillo Cruz, whose requests for appointed counsel and permission to proceed without paying appeal fees were denied, but whose request for a copy of the complaint was granted; the underlying case had already been dismissed.
What happened
In Cruz v. Ortiz, Guillermo Trujillo Cruz brought an unrepresented civil-rights case against A. Ortiz under a federal law allowing suits against state officials. The court had earlier revoked Cruz’s permission to proceed without paying fees because he had at least three prior cases dismissed as strikes.
The court then dismissed the case after Cruz did not pay the filing and administrative fees, and judgment was entered for the defendants. Cruz appealed and asked this court to appoint counsel, let him proceed without paying appeal fees, and provide a copy of his complaint.
Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. denied the request for counsel as moot because the case was closed, denied permission to proceed without paying appeal fees because the appeal was not taken in good faith, and granted the request for a complaint copy.
The detailed version
- Cruz v. Ortiz · No. 4:20-cv-00176
- Haywood Gilliam
- June 22, 2020
Background
Guillermo Trujillo Cruz filed this unrepresented civil-rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The court previously revoked his permission to proceed without paying filing fees under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), finding that before filing this action he had at least three cases dismissed as “strikes.” The court ordered him to pay the filing and administrative fees in full if he wanted to continue.
On April 29, 2020, the court dismissed the action for failure to pay those fees and entered judgment in favor of the defendants. Cruz filed a notice of appeal in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on May 18, 2020.
Requests Before the Court
Cruz asked the court to appoint counsel, to allow him to proceed on appeal without paying fees, and to provide him with a copy of his complaint. Although he titled the appeal-related filing a request to review the docketing-fee order, the court treated it as a request to proceed without paying fees on appeal.
Rulings
Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. denied the request for appointment of counsel as moot because the case was closed. The court stated that a request for counsel for the appellate proceedings should be made to the Ninth Circuit.
The court denied Cruz’s request to proceed without paying fees on appeal. It found that the appeal was not taken in good faith under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3).
The court granted Cruz’s request for a copy of the complaint and stated that it would provide the copy separately. The order terminated the three requests. This order addressed the post-judgment requests and did not decide the merits of the underlying civil-rights claims.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.