Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_12-cv-01400/USCOURTS-casd-3_12-cv-01400-0/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

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MARCUS D. TURNER, Civil No. 12-1400 JLS (RBB)

Petitioner,

ORDER DISMISSING CASE 

WITHOUT PREJUDICE AND WITH

LEAVE TO AMEND

v.

VISTA ADULT PROBATION, 

Respondent.

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

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. (ECF No. 1.) 

FAILURE TO SATISFY FILING FEE REQUIREMENT

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

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

proceed in forma pauperis See Rule 3(a), 28 U.S.C. foll. § 2254. 

FAILURE TO NAME PROPER RESPONDENT

Review of the Petition reveals that Petitioner has failed to name a proper respondent. On federal

habeas, a state prisoner must name the state officer having custody of him as the respondent. Ortiz-

-1-

Case 3:12-cv-01400-JLS-RBB Document 2 Filed 06/14/12 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

27

28

Sandoval v. Gomez, 81 F.3d 891, 894 (9th Cir. 1996) (citing Rule 2(a), 28 U.S.C. foll. § 2254). Federal

courts lack personal jurisdiction when a habeas petition fails to name a proper respondent. See id.

The warden is the typical respondent. However, “the rules following section 2254 do not specify

the warden.” Id. “[T]he ‘state officer having custody’ may be ‘either the warden of the institution in

which the petitioner is incarcerated . . . or the chief officer in charge of state penal institutions.’” Id.

(quoting Rule 2(a), 28 U.S.C. foll. § 2254 advisory committee’s note). If “a petitioner is in custody due

to the state action he is challenging, ‘[t]he named respondent shall be the state officer who has official

custody of the petitioner (for example, the warden of the prison).’” Id. (quoting Rule 2, 28 U.S.C. foll.

§ 2254 advisory committee’s note). If a “petitioner is on probation or parole, he may name his probation

or parole officer ‘and the official in charge of the parole or probation agency, or the state correctional

agency, as appropriate.’” Id. (quoting Rule 2, 28 U.S.C. foll. § 2254 advisory committee’s note). In

some cases, a petitioner may name the state attorney general. Id.

A long standing rule in the Ninth Circuit holds “that a petitioner may not seek [a writ of] habeas

corpus against the State under . . . [whose] authority . . . the petitioner is in custody. The actual person

who is [the] custodian [of the petitioner] must be the respondent.” Ashley v. Washington, 394 F.2d 125,

126 (9th Cir. 1968). This requirement exists because a writ of habeas corpus acts upon the custodian

of the state prisoner, the person who will produce “the body” if directed to do so by the Court. “Both

the warden of a California prison and the Director of Corrections for California have the power to

produce the prisoner.” Ortiz-Sandoval, 81 F.3d at 895.

Here, Petitioner has incorrectly named “Vista Adult Probation,” as Respondent. In order for this

Court to entertain a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, Petitioner must name the person who will

produce “the body” if directed to do so by the Court. Because Petitioner is on probation, the proper

respondents are his probation officer and the official in charge of the probation agency. See OrtizSandoval, 81 F.3d at 894. 

CONCLUSION

Accordingly, the Court DISMISSES the Petition without prejudice and with leave to amend. 

To have this case reopened, Petitioner must, no later than August 17, 2012: (1) pay the $5.00 filing

fee OR submit adequate proof of his inability to pay the fee; AND (2) file a First Amended Petition that

-2-

Case 3:12-cv-01400-JLS-RBB Document 2 Filed 06/14/12 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

27

28

cures the pleading deficiencies outlined in this Order. The Clerk of Court is directed to mail a blank

motion to proceed in forma pauperis form and a blank First Amended Petition form to Petitioner

together with a copy of this Order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: June 14, 2012

Honorable Janis L. Sammartino

United States District Judge

-3-

Case 3:12-cv-01400-JLS-RBB Document 2 Filed 06/14/12 Page 3 of 3