Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_10-cv-00454/USCOURTS-azd-2_10-cv-00454-0/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

JDDL

WO MDR

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Eltorna Gant, Sr., 

Petitioner, 

vs.

State of Arizona, et al.,

Respondents. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 10-454-PHX-MHM (LOA)

ORDER

On March 1, 2010, Petitioner Eltorna Gant, Sr., who is confined in the Arizona State

Prison Complex-Tucson in Tucson, Arizona, filed a pro se Petition for Writ of Habeas

Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Doc. #1), an Application fo Appointment of Counsel

(Doc. #3), and an Affidavit, and paid the $5.00 filing fee. 

I. Petition

Petitioner was convicted in Pinal County Superior Court, case #CR-2000027076, of

first-degree murder and two counts of attempted first-degree murder. He was sentenced to

life imprisonment without the possibility of parole on the first-degree murder conviction and

18-year terms of imprisonment for each of the attempted first-degree murder convictions.

In his Petition, Petitioner names the State of Arizona as Respondent and the Arizona

Attorney General as an Additional Respondent. 

II. Lack of Personal Jurisdiction

A petitioner for habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S. § 2254 must name the state officer

having custody of him as the respondent to the petition. Belgarde v. Montana, 123 F.3d

Case 2:10-cv-00454-MHM--LOA Document 7 Filed 03/23/10 Page 1 of 4
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

JDDL - 2 -

1210, 1212 (9th Cir. 1997). Typically, this person is the warden of the institution where the

petitioner is incarcerated. “Failure to name the petitioner’s custodian as a respondent

deprives federal courts of personal jurisdiction.” Stanley v. California Supreme Court, 21

F.3d 359, 360 (9th Cir. 1994).

Petitioner has named the State of Arizona as Respondent. The State of Arizona,

however, is not a proper respondent in a § 2254 habeas corpus petition. Thus, the Court

lacks jurisdiction over this case and will dismiss it.

III. Application for Appointment of Counsel

In his Application for Appointment of Counsel, Petitioner requests counsel because

he cannot afford an attorney, the convictions are complicated and serious, and he believes

he has “good strong issues’ that he wishes to present. 

“Indigent state prisoners applying for habeas corpus relief are not entitled to appointed

counsel unless the circumstances of a particular case indicate that appointed counsel is

necessary to prevent due process violations.” Chaney v. Lewis, 801 F.2d 1191, 1196 (9th

Cir. 1986). However, the Court has discretion to appoint counsel when “the interests of

justice so require.” 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2)(B).

Petitioner has not made the necessary showing for appointment of counsel at this time,

and, therefore, his Application for Appointment of Counsel will be denied without prejudice.

If, at a later date, the Court determines that an evidentiary hearing is required, counsel will

be appointed in accordance with Rule 8(c) of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Proceedings.

IV. Leave to Amend

For the foregoing reasons, Petitioner’s Petition will be dismissed for lack of

jurisdiction. Within 30 days, Petitioner may submit a first amended petition to cure the

deficiencies outlined above. The Clerk of Court will mail Petitioner a court-approved form

to use for filing an amended petition. 

Petitioner is cautioned that if he fails to file his amended petition on the courtapproved form included with this Order, it will be stricken and the action dismissed without

further notice to Petitioner.

Case 2:10-cv-00454-MHM--LOA Document 7 Filed 03/23/10 Page 2 of 4
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

JDDL - 3 -

Petitioner is advised that the amended petition must be retyped or rewritten in its

entirety on the court-approved form and may not incorporate any part of the original Petition

by reference. Any amended petition submitted by Petitioner should be clearly designated as

such on the face of the document. 

An amended petition supersedes the original petition. Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d

1258, 1262 (9th Cir. 1992); Hal Roach Studios v. Richard Feiner & Co., Inc., 896 F.2d 1542,

1546 (9th Cir. 1990). After amendment, the original pleading is treated as nonexistent.

Ferdik, 963 F.2d at 1262. Thus, grounds for relief alleged in an original petition which are

not alleged in an amended petition are waived. King v. Atiyeh, 814 F.2d 565, 567 (9th Cir.

1987).

V. Warnings

A. Address Changes

Petitioner must file and serve a notice of a change of address in accordance with Rule

83.3(d) of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure. Petitioner must not include a motion for other

relief with a notice of change of address. Failure to comply may result in dismissal of this

action.

B. Copies

Petitioner must submit an additional copy of every filing for use by the Court. LRCiv

5.4. Failure to comply may result in the filing being stricken without further notice to

Petitioner.

C. Possible Dismissal

If Petitioner fails to timely comply with every provision of this Order, including these

warnings, the Court may dismiss this action without further notice. See Ferdik, 963 F.2d

at1260-61 (a district court may dismiss an action for failure to comply with any order of the

Court).

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

Case 2:10-cv-00454-MHM--LOA Document 7 Filed 03/23/10 Page 3 of 4
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

JDDL - 4 -

IT IS ORDERED:

(1) Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. #1) is dismissed for lack

of jurisdiction, without prejudice and with leave to amend. Petitioner shall have 30 days

from the filing date of this Order to file an amended petition in compliance with this Order.

(2) If Petitioner fails to submit an amended petition on the court-approved form

within 30 days from the filing date of this Order, the Clerk of Court must, without further

notice, enter a judgment of dismissal of this action, without prejudice.

(3) Petitioner’s Application for Appointment of Counsel (Doc. #3) is denied

without prejudice.

(4) The Clerk of Court must send Petitioner the current court-approved form for

filing a “Petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for a Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State

Custody (Non-Death Penalty).”

DATED this 21st day of March, 2010.

Case 2:10-cv-00454-MHM--LOA Document 7 Filed 03/23/10 Page 4 of 4