Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_13-cv-00548/USCOURTS-casd-3_13-cv-00548-0/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 

FILED 

13HAH 20 Prl I: 45 

:.:L~: 

H'f~--.---"

6 

7 

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

10 

11 JERRY BRYANT BOWMAN, 

12 Petitioner, 

13 v. 

14 II UNKNOWN, 

15 II Respondent. 

Civil No. 13-0548 WQH (RBB) 

ORDER DISMISSING CASE 

WITHOUT PREJUDICE AND WITH 

LEAVE TO AMEND 

16 II Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas 

17 II Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. 

18 II FAILURE TO SATISFY FILING FEE REQUIREMENT 

19 II Petitioner has failed to pay the $5.00 filing fee and has failed to move to proceed in forma 

20 II pauperis. This Court cannot proceed until Petitioner has either paid the $5.00 filing fee or 

21 II qualified to proceed in forma pauperis. See Rule 3(a), 28 U.S.c. fo11. § 2254. 

22 II FAILURE TO NAME PROPER RESPONDENT 

23 II Review ofthe Petition reveals that Petitioner has failed to name a proper respondent. On 

24 II federal habeas, a state prisoner must name the state officer having custody of him as the 

2511 respondent. Ortiz-Sandoval v. Gomez, 81 F.3d 891,894 (9th Cir. 1996) (citing Rule 2(a), 28 

2611 U.S.C. foIl. § 2254). Federal courts lack personal jurisdiction when a habeas petition fails to 

27 II name a proper respondent. See id. 

28 II II 

1:'£vCI)1lI'I&\_EflLE-PROSE\WQH'l:.kv{)HS dilllmi.at.•3Ull -1­

Case 3:13-cv-00548-WQH-RBB Document 3 Filed 03/20/13 Page 1 of 3
5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

1 II The warden is the typical respondent. However, "the rules following section 2254 do not 

2 II specify the warden." Id. "[T]he 'state officer having custody' may be 'either the warden ofthe 

3 II institution in which the petitioner is incarcerated ... or the chief officer in charge ofstate penal 

4 II institutions.'" Id. (quoting Rule 2(a), 28 U.S.c. foil. § 2254 advisory committee's note). If"a 

II petitioner is in custody due to the state action he is challenging, '[t]he named respondent shall 

611 be the state officer who has official custody of the petitioner (for example, the warden of the 

711 prison).'" Id. (quoting Rule 2,28 U.S.C. foIl. § 2254 advisory committee's note). 

8 II A long standing rule in the Ninth Circuit holds "that a petitioner may not seek [a writ of] 

911 habeas corpus against the State under ... [whose] authority ... the petitioner is in custody. The 

II actual person who is [the] custodian [of the petitioner] must be the respondent." Ashley v. 

11 II Washington, 394 F.2d 125, 126 (9th Cir. 1968). This requirement exists because a writ of 

12 \I habeas corpus acts upon the custodian of the state prisoner, the person who will produce "the 

13 \I body" ifdirected to do so by the Court. "Both the warden ofa California prison and the Director 

14 II ofCorrections for California have the power to produce the prisoner." Ortiz-Sandoval, 81 F.3d 

at 895. 

16 Here, Petitioner has not named a respondent. In order for this Court to entertain the 

17 II Petition filed in this action, Petitioner must name the warden in charge ofthe state correctional 

18 \I facility in which Petitioner is presently confined or the Director ofthe California Department of 

1911 Corrections. Brittingham v. United States, 982 F.2d 378,379 (9th Cir. 1992) (per curiam). 

II 

21 II 

22 II 

23 II 

24 II 

II 

26 II 

27 II 

28 II 

1:\E.~\_EF1LE.PROSL'WQlf,13t'\'054S~wpd, 31513 -2­

Case 3:13-cv-00548-WQH-RBB Document 3 Filed 03/20/13 Page 2 of 3
5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

- ­ - William Q. H 

United States Dis 

1. 

1 II CONCLUSION AND ORDER 

2 II Accordingly, the Court DISMISSES the Petition without prejudice and with leave to 

3 II amend due to Petitioner's failure to satisfy the filing fee requirement and for his failure to name 

411 a proper respondent. To have this case reopened, Petitioner must submit the $5.00 fee or 

II adequate proof of his inability to pay the fee AND a First Amended Petition which cures the 

6 II pleading deficiencies noted above no later than May 21, 2013. The Clerk ofCourt is directed 

! 

7 II to send Petitioner a blank Southern District ofCalifornia In Forma Pauperis Application and 

8 II a blank First Amended Petition form along with a copy ofthis Order. 

911 IT IS.5H1D. 

II DATED: ~~ 

1111 

12 

13 

14 

16 

17 

18 

19 

21 

22 

23 

24 

26 

27 

28 

II 1;'J:wryOl'lD~EFH..£-PROSEIWQlf,lkvtl'43 diamlawpli. J mJ -3­

Case 3:13-cv-00548-WQH-RBB Document 3 Filed 03/20/13 Page 3 of 3