UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

COREY COLLINS,

Petitioner, 

v.

MARY BERGHUIS,

Respondent. 

 /

Case Number: 2:09-CV-10627

OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING PETITIONER’S “MOTION TO AMEND

PARTY RESPONDENT” [Dkt. # 2] AND GRANTING PETITIONER’S “MOTION 

TO AMEND PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS” [Dkt. # 3]

Before the court are two motions by Petitioner Corey Collins, both filed February

20, 2009: (1) “Motion to Amend Party Respondent,” and (2) “Motion to Amend Petition

for Writ of Habeas Corpus.” On February 19, 2009, Petitioner filed a petition for a writ of

habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Through his motions, Petitioner now

seeks to amend his petition for a writ of habeas. 

Section 2242 of Title 28 provides that an application for a writ of habeas corpus

“may be amended or supplemented as provided in the rules of procedure applicable to

civil actions.” 28 U.S.C. § 2242. The applicable civil procedure rule, Federal Rule of

Civil Procedure 15, allows a party to amend a pleading once as a matter of course at

any time before a responsive pleading is served or by leave of court. Fed. R. Civ. P.

15(a). A responsive pleading has not yet been filed by Respondent. 

In his “Motion to Amend Party Respondent,” Petitioner states that an

administrative error resulted in the incorrect Respondent being named in the original

2:09-cv-10627-SJM-MKM Doc # 6 Filed 03/12/09 Pg 1 of 3 Pg ID 216
2

petition. The proper respondent for a habeas petition filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254

is the state officer having custody of the petitioner. See Rule 2, Rules Governing

Section 2254 Cases. Petitioner is incarcerated at the Carson City Correctional Facility

in Carson City, Michigan. The Warden of that facility is Blaine Lafler, and he is the

proper Respondent in this matter. Therefore, the court grants “Petitioner’s Motion to

Amend Party Respondent.” 

Petitioner has also filed a “Motion to Amend Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus,”

seeking to amend his petition to include a claim inadvertently omitted from the original

petition. Petitioner filed his motion to amend the day after he filed his original petition,

and little, if any, prejudice could result to Respondent by allowing Petitioner’s motion to

amend. Thus, the court finds that the interests of justice are best served by permitting

Petitioner to amend his petition. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2) (“The court should freely

give leave [to amend] when justice so requires.”). Accordingly, 

IT IS ORDERED that Petitioner’s “Motion to Amend Party Respondent” [Dkt. # 2]

is GRANTED. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner’s “Motion to Amend Petition for Writ

of Habeas Corpus” [Dkt. # 3] is GRANTED.

Finally, IT IS ORDERED that the Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to amend the case

caption to read: “Corey Collins v. Blaine Lafler.” 

s/Robert H. Cleland 

ROBERT H. CLELAND

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Dated: March 12, 2009

2:09-cv-10627-SJM-MKM Doc # 6 Filed 03/12/09 Pg 2 of 3 Pg ID 217
S:\Cleland\JUDGE'S DESK\C2 ORDERS\09-10627.COLLINS.Grant.Amend.Habeas.Pleadings.mbc.ljd.wpd

3

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was mailed to counsel of record

on this date, March 12, 2009, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.

s/Lisa G. Wagner 

Case Manager and Deputy Clerk

(313) 234-5522

2:09-cv-10627-SJM-MKM Doc # 6 Filed 03/12/09 Pg 3 of 3 Pg ID 218