Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_12-cv-02479/USCOURTS-casd-3_12-cv-02479-1/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

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

NOLAN DEMETRIUS JACKSON, Civil

No.

12cv2479-BEN (BGS)

Petitioner,

ORDER SUA SPONTE

SUBSTITUTING RESPONDENTS 

vs.

JEFFREY BEARD, Secretary,

Respondent.

On October 11, 2012, Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed a Petition

for a Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, naming “P. D. Brazelton,”

the Warden of the institution where Petitioner was confined, and “Kamala Harris,” the

California Attorney General, as Respondents. Petitioner has now submitted a Notice of

change of address indicating that he has been transferred to another prison. Because

Petitioner’s custodian has changed, the Warden of the institution where Petitioner was

previously housed is no longer a proper Respondent.

A writ of habeas corpus acts upon the custodian of the state prisoner. See 28

U.S.C. § 2242; Rule 2(a), 28 U.S.C. foll. § 2254. In order to conform with the

requirements of Rule 2(a) of the Rules Governing § 2254 Cases and to avoid changing

the Respondent again if Petitioner is transferred to another prison or paroled, the Court

hereby sua sponteORDERS the substitution ofJeffreyBeard,Secretary ofthe California

I:\Chambers Skomal\Cases\Habeas\N Jackson--12cv2479\12cv2479-Substitute.wpd, 62613 -1- 12cv2479

Case 3:12-cv-02479-BEN-BGS Document 24 Filed 06/26/13 Page 1 of 2
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

Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, as Respondent in place of “P. D.

Brazelton.” See Ortiz-Sandoval v. Gomez, 81 F.3d 891, 894 (9th Cir. 1996) (stating that

the respondent in § 2254 proceedings may be the chief officer in charge of state penal

institutions).

Additionally, Kamala Harris, the AttorneyGeneral ofthe State ofCalifornia, is not

a proper respondent in this action. Rule 2 of the Rules following § 2254 provides that

the state officer having custody of the petitioner shall be named as respondent. Rule

2(a), 28 U.S.C. foll. § 2254. However, “[i]f the petitioner is not yet in custody – but may

be subject to future custody – under the state-court judgment being contested, the

petition must name as respondents both the officer who has current custody and the

attorney general of the state where the judgement was entered.” Rule 2 (b), 28 U.S.C.

foll. § 2254. Here, there is no basis for Petitioner to have named the Attorney General

as a respondent in this action

The Clerk of the Court shall modify the docket to reflect “Jeffrey Beard,

Secretary” as Respondent in place of “P. D. Brazelton” and “Kamala Harris.”

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: June 26, 2013

Hon. Bernard G. Skomal

U.S. Magistrate Judge

United States District Court

CC: ALL PARTIES

I:\Chambers Skomal\Cases\Habeas\N Jackson--12cv2479\12cv2479-Substitute.wpd, 62613 -2- 12cv2479

Case 3:12-cv-02479-BEN-BGS Document 24 Filed 06/26/13 Page 2 of 2