Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00663/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00663-0/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CHRISTOPHER BROWNEN, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

)

)

)

STATE OF CALIFORNIA PEOPLE, )

)

Respondent. )

___________________________________ )

CV F 05-0663 OWW WMW HC

ORDER REQUIRING

PETITIONER TO FILE FIRST

AMENDED PETITION ON

CORRECT FORM AND TO

NAME PROPER RESPONDENT

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas

corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate

Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 72-302.

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

officer having custody of him as the respondent to the petition. Rule 2 (a) of the Rules

Governing § 2254 Cases; Ortiz-Sandoval v. Gomez, 81 F.3d 891, 894 (9th Cir. 1996);

Stanley v. California Supreme Court, 21 F.3d 359, 360 (9th Cir. 1994). Normally, the person

having custody of an incarcerated petitioner is the warden of the prison in which the

Case 1:05-cv-00663-OWW -WMW Document 4 Filed 07/24/06 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

petitioner is incarcerated because the warden has "day-to-day control over" the petitioner. 

Brittingham v. United States, 982 F.2d 378, 379 (9th Cir. 1992); see, also, Stanley v.

California Supreme Court, 21 F.3d 359, 360 (9th Cir. 1994). However, the chief officer in

charge of state penal institutions is also appropriate. Ortiz, 81 F.3d at 894; Stanley, 21 F.3d at

360. Where a petitioner is on probation or parole, the proper respondent is his probation or

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

agency. Id. 

In this case, Petitioner names “State of California People” s Respondent. Although

Petitioner is currently in the custody of the California Department of Corrections, the

Department cannot be considered the person having day-to-day control over Petitioner.

Petitioner’s failure to name a proper respondent requires dismissal of his habeas

petition for lack of jurisdiction. Stanley, 21 F.3d at 360; Olson v. California Adult Auth.,

423 F.2d 1326, 1326 (9th Cir. 1970); see, also, Billiteri v. United States Bd. Of Parole, 541

F.2d 938, 948 (2nd Cir. 1976). However, in this case, the court will give Petitioner the

opportunity to cure his defect by filed a first amended petition naming a proper respondent. 

See, West v. Louisiana, 478 F.2d 1026, 1029 (5th Cir.1973), vacated in part on other

grounds, 510 F.2d 363 (5th Cir.1975) (en banc) (allowing petitioner to amend petition to

name proper respondent); Ashley v. State of Washington, 394 F.2d 125 (9th Cir. 1968)

(same).

Additionally, petitions for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to Section 2254 filed in this

court must be filed on the form designated by the court. Therefore, the court will require

Petitioner to file a first amended petition on the correct form.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows:

1. The Clerk of the Court shall send Petitioner a copy of the form for filing a Section

2254 habeas corpus petition in this court;

2. Petitioner shall, within thirty days of service of this order, file a first amended petition

Case 1:05-cv-00663-OWW -WMW Document 4 Filed 07/24/06 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

in this court on the correct form and naming the correct respondent. Petitioner is

cautioned that his failure to comply with this order will result in a recommendation

that this action be dismissed.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 21, 2006 /s/ William M. Wunderlich 

bl0dc4 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-00663-OWW -WMW Document 4 Filed 07/24/06 Page 3 of 3