Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_16-cv-02643/USCOURTS-caed-2_16-cv-02643-0/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 

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

BRYCE WAYNE NICHOLES, 

Petitioner, 

v. 

M.A. STANCIL, 

Respondent. 

No. 2:16-cv-2643 AC P 

ORDER 

Petitioner, a prisoner in federal custody, has filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus 

challenging a state conviction. Petitioner has also filed a request for leave to proceed in forma 

pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. However, the certificate portion of the in forma pauperis 

application has not been filled out and signed by an authorized prison official. See Rule 3(a)(2), 

Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases. Petitioner is advised that he is not required to submit a 

certified copy of his trust account statement, but the certificate portion of the application which 

states how much he currently has in his trust account must be completed and signed by a prison 

official. Petitioner will be given an opportunity to submit a fully completed application to 

proceed in forma pauperis. 

“The federal habeas statute gives the United States district courts jurisdiction to entertain 

petitions for habeas relief only from persons who are ‘in custody in violation of the Constitution 

or laws or treaties of the United States.’” Maleng v. Cook, 490 U.S. 488, 491 (1989) (emphasis 

Case 2:16-cv-02643-MCE-AC Document 6 Filed 11/22/16 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 

2

in original) (citing 28 U.S.C. § 2241(c)(3); 28 U.S.C. § 2254(a)). Because petitioner is in federal 

custody, it appears likely that he is not currently serving time for the state conviction that he is 

attempting to challenge. It is not, however, impossible. See 18 U.S.C. § 5003 (allowing the 

Director of the Bureau of Prisons to contract with state officials to allow for the housing of state 

offenders in federal facilities). If that is the case, then habeas jurisdiction lies. Moreover, “[a] 

state detainer warrant against a federal prisoner is sufficient ‘custody’ to confer habeas corpus 

jurisdiction.” Rose v. Morris, 619 F.2d 42, 43 (9th Cir. 1980) (citations omitted); Maleng, 

490 U.S. at 493 (because state had filed a detainer with federal authorities, petitioner serving 

federal sentence was “in custody” for purposes of challenging a state sentence which he had not 

yet begun to serve), but see Wilson v. Belleque, 554 F.3d 816, 823-24 & n.2 (9th Cir. 2009) 

(recognizing that Supreme Court has left open the question of whether a detainer is necessary to 

confer jurisdiction where sovereign with physical custody is distinct from sovereign lodging 

detainer and declining to express an opinion (citing Braden v. 30th Judicial Cir. Court of Ky., 

410 U.S. 484, 489 n.4 (1973)). 

It is not clear from the petition whether the court has jurisdiction over petitioner’s claims. 

In order for this court to determine whether it has jurisdiction, the California Attorney General’s 

Office shall be required to appear for the limited purpose of advising the court whether petitioner 

is currently in federal custody for the state convictions he is challenging in the instant petition or 

whether the State of California, or one of its entities or officials, has lodged a detainer against 

petitioner. 

 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 

1. The Clerk of the Court shall provide petitioner with another copy of the in forma 

pauperis application used by this court. 

 2. Petitioner shall submit, within thirty days from the date of this order, a fully completed 

in forma pauperis application. Petitioner’s failure to comply with this order will result in a 

recommendation that this action be dismissed without prejudice. 

3. Within thirty days from the date of this order, the California Attorney General’s Office 

shall be required to appear for the limited purpose of advising the court whether petitioner is 

Case 2:16-cv-02643-MCE-AC Document 6 Filed 11/22/16 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 

3

currently in federal custody for the state convictions he is challenging in the instant petition or 

whether the State of California, or one of its entities or officials, has lodged a detainer against 

petitioner. 

 4. The Clerk of the Court shall serve a copy of this order and a copy of the petition for 

writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 on Michael Patrick Farrell, Senior Assistant 

Attorney General. 

DATED: November 21, 2016. 

Case 2:16-cv-02643-MCE-AC Document 6 Filed 11/22/16 Page 3 of 3