Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_20-cv-00653/USCOURTS-caed-2_20-cv-00653-0/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 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

BILLY THOMAS WOLFINGTON, 

Petitioner, 

v. 

C. PFEIFFER, Warden, 

Respondent. 

No. 2:20-cv-0653 AC P 

ORDER 

 Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with a petition for 

writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. By order filed April 13, 2020, this court 

directed respondent to file and serve a response to the petition within 60 days. Currently pending 

is petitioner’s “Motion to Amend Based on Judges Observations,” prepared by petitioner’s “next 

friend attorney” (“NFA”), another inmate whose name is Derrick Perryman. ECF No. 11. The 

motion is signed by plaintiff. The motion does not seek to add any different or additional grounds 

for relief. Rather, the filing states that Mr. Perryman has identified technical deficiencies (which 

are not specified) and noted the omission of a “Points and Authorities” section. The motion also 

emphasizes that prisoners currently have very limited access to the prison law library due to the 

COVID-19 health crisis. Petitioner seeks authorization to submit an amended petition or “if not 

then [petitioner] prays ‘to continue’ this action and will answer the state’s response.” Id. at 7. 

//// 

Case 2:20-cv-00653-KJM-AC Document 13 Filed 05/01/20 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 

2 

 The court found the original petition adequate to identify the substance of petitioner’s 

claims and require a response from respondent. Neither technical corrections nor points and 

authorities are necessary for such a response, and respondent will have access to the full record. 

Petitioner will then have the opportunity to reply. The court will undertake an independent 

review of the merits of the case after the response and reply are filed. If material information is 

missing or additional information is required, petitioner will be so informed. For these reasons, 

the undersigned finds the requested relief unnecessary. 

 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that petitioner’s “motion to amend,” ECF No. 

11, is denied without prejudice. 

DATED: May 1, 2020 

Case 2:20-cv-00653-KJM-AC Document 13 Filed 05/01/20 Page 2 of 2