Task: songer_respond1_5_2

What follows is an opinion from a United States Court of Appeals.
Intervenors who participated as parties at the courts of appeals should be counted as either appellants or respondents when it can be determined whose position they supported. For example, if there were two plaintiffs who lost in district court, appealed, and were joined by four intervenors who also asked the court of appeals to reverse the district court, the number of appellants should be coded as six.
When coding the detailed nature of participants, use your personal knowledge about the participants, if you are completely confident of the accuracy of your knowledge, even if the specific information is not in the opinion. For example, if "IBM" is listed as the appellant it could be classified as "clearly national or international in scope" even if the opinion did not indicate the scope of the business. 

Your task concerns the first listed respondent. The nature of this litigant falls into the category "state government (includes territories & commonwealths)". Your task is to determine which category of state government best describes this litigant.

PER CURIAM:
Uribe, a state prisoner, appeals the decision of the District Court denying a petition for writ of habeas corpus, 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (1970).
Uribe claims that his conviction should be reversed under Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966), because he received inadequate warnings during his initial interrogation. However, he was not prejudiced in any way by these inadequate warnings since he gave no confession, made no damaging statements, and, in fact, pleaded guilty at trial. In these circumstances, there is nothing to which the Miranda rule can apply.
Uribe also claims that his attorney and the prosecution made a plea bargain which was not kept. The District Court held an evidentiary hearing on this issue. See Macon v. Craven, 457 F.2d 342 (9th Cir. 1972). The record supports the decision of the lower court that no bargain had been struck.
Finally, Uribe alleges that he pleaded guilty to and was convicted of a crime other than the one with which he was charged. Upon this claim he has failed to exhaust his available state remedies.
Affirmed.

Question: This question concerns the first listed respondent. The nature of this litigant falls into the category "state government (includes territories & commonwealths)". Which category of state government best describes this litigant?
A. legislative
B. executive/administrative
C. bureaucracy providing services
D. bureaucracy in charge of regulation
E. bureaucracy in charge of general administration
F. judicial
G. other
Answer:

Answer: F