Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_16-cv-00969/USCOURTS-casd-3_16-cv-00969-0/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 

6 

7 

FILED 

MAY 11 2016 

CLERK US DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

BY .~~DEPUTY 

8 

9 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

10 

11 KENDRICK LAMOUNT WINE, 

12 Petitioner, 

13 v. 

14 BOARD OF PAROLE HEARINGS, 

15 

16 

Respondent. 

Case No. 16cv0969 BEN (RBB) 

ORDER DISMISSING PETITION 

WITHOUT PREJUDICE AND WITH 

LEAVE TO AMEND 

17 Petitioner, a prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas 

18 Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, and has paid the requisite filing fee. 

19 FAILURE TO NAME A PROPER RESPONDENT 

20 Review ofthe Petition reveals that Petitioner has failed to name a proper respondent. 

21 On federal habeas, a state prisoner must name the state officer having custody of him as 

22 the respondent. Ortiz-Sandoval v. Gomez, 81 F.3d 891, 894 (9th Cir. 1996) (citing Rule 

23 2(a), 28 U.S.C. foil. § 2254). Federal courts lack personal jurisdiction when a habeas 

24 petition fails to name a proper respondent. See id. 

25 The warden is the typical respondent. However, "the rules following section 2254 

26 do not specify the warden." Id. "[T]he 'state officer having custody' may be 'either the 

27 warden of the institution in which the petitioner is incarcerated ... or the chief officer in 

28 charge of state penal institutions. '" Id. (quoting advisory committee notes to Rule 2( a), 28 

1 ncvOQnQ HFN IRHHI 

Case 3:16-cv-00969-BEN-BLM Document 3 Filed 05/11/16 PageID.<pageID> Page 1 of 2
1 U.S.C. fol1. § 2254). If"a petitioner is in custody due to the state action he is challenging, 

2 '[t]he named respondent shall be the state officer who has official custody ofthe petitioner 

3 (for example, the warden of the prison).'" Id. (quoting advisory committee notes to Rule 

4 2, 28 U.S.C. fol1. § 2254). 

5 Here, Petitioner has incorrectly named "Board of Parole Hearings," as Respondent. 

6 In order for this Court to entertain the Petition filed in this action, Petitioner must name the 

7 warden in charge of the state correctional facility in which Petitioner is presently confined 

8 or the Secretary of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. 

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

10 CONCLUSION 

11 Accordingly, the Court DISMISSES the Petition without prejudice due to 

12 Petitioner's failure to name a proper respondent. To have this case reopened, Petitioner 

13 must file a First Amended Petition no later than June 27, 2016, in conformance with this 

14 Order. (A blank petition form is included with this Order for Petitioner's convenience.) 

15 IT IS SO ORDERED. 

16 

17 Dated: May 1/-, 2016 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

Uni ed States District Judge 

2 

1 /ie.vOQ/iQ R FN !R R R\ 

Case 3:16-cv-00969-BEN-BLM Document 3 Filed 05/11/16 PageID.<pageID> Page 2 of 2