Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-02208/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-02208-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DELBERT WILLIAMS,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-06-2208 FCD DAD P

vs.

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, 

et al.,

Respondents. ORDER

 /

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with an amended petition for a writ

of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On October 13, 2006, the court ordered

petitioner to file an in forma pauperis application and an amended petition because his original

petition was incomplete. Petitioner has filed both documents.

Examination of the in forma pauperis application reveals that petitioner is unable

to afford the costs of suit. Accordingly, the application to proceed in forma pauperis will be

granted. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a).

However, petitioner’s amended petition is once again defective. “A petitioner for

habeas corpus relief must name the state officer having custody of him or her as the respondent

to the petition.” Stanley v. California Supreme Court, 21 F.3d 359, 360 (9th Cir. 1994) (citing

Rule 2(a), 28 U.S.C. foll. § 2254). Petitioner has named the Long Beach Superior Court as the

Case 2:06-cv-02208-FCD-DAD Document 8 Filed 02/21/08 Page 1 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

2

respondent in this action. The state trial court is not a proper respondent in this action. 

Accordingly, the instant petition must be dismissed with leave to amend. See Stanley, 21 F.3d at

360. In his second amended petition, petitioner must name the warden of the facility where he is

currently incarcerated. 

From the amended petition before this court it appears that petitioner is seeking to

challenge a 1987 conviction for second degree murder. (Am. Pet. at 2.) In addition, it appears

that petitioner pled nolo contendere, was sentenced to a term of fifteen years to life

imprisonment, appealed his conviction and subsequently filed state habeas petitions with the

California Court of Appeal and the California Supreme Court. (Id. at 2-4.) However, beyond

this information, there are several questions on the form petition that remain unanswered even in

the amended petition before this court. In his second amended petition, petitioner must answer

each question on the form petition. He must also clearly identify the claims that he presented to

the state courts, the state courts’ decisions and the dates of those decisions. In this regard,

petitioner may attach a copy of the state court decisions to his petition.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Petitioner’s application to proceed in forma pauperis is granted;

2. Petitioner’s amended petition, filed on October 24, 2006, is dismissed with

leave to file a second amended petition within thirty days from the date of this order;

3. The second amended petition must be filed on the form employed by this court,

must name the proper respondent, must state all claims and prayers for relief on the form, and

must provide an answer for each questions. It must bear the case number assigned to this action

and must bear the title “Second Amended Petition”; and

/////

/////

/////

/////

Case 2:06-cv-02208-FCD-DAD Document 8 Filed 02/21/08 Page 2 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

3

4. The Clerk of the Court is directed to send petitioner the form for habeas corpus

application.

DATED: February 20, 2008.

DAD:4

will2208.122

Case 2:06-cv-02208-FCD-DAD Document 8 Filed 02/21/08 Page 3 of 3