Joseph T. Hill, III v. Mark C. Kim

Filing 10

ORDER OF DISMISSAL by Judge Dale S. Fischer. IT IS ORDERED that the Petition 1 be dismissed without prejudice. (See Order for complete details) (afe)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

10

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA-WESTERN DIVISION

11
12
13
14

15 JOSEPH HILL, III,
16

) Case No. CV 17-02486-DSF (AS)
)
) ORDER OF DISMISSAL
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Petitioner,

17
v.

18
19

Judge KIM,
Respondent.

20
21
22

I.

BACKGROUND

23
24

On

March

24,

2017,

Joseph

Hill,

III

(“Petitioner”),

25 proceeding pro se, filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus by
26 a

Person

in

State

Custody

pursuant

to

28

U.S.C.

§

2254

27 (“Petition”), in the United States District Court for the Eastern
28 District of California. (Docket Entry No. 1). On March 28, 2017,
1

1 the Petition was transferred to the United States District Court
2 for the Central District of California.

(Docket Entry No. 6).

3
4

A Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus can only be issued if

5 petitioner is in state custody and that such custody is in
6 violation of the Constitution, laws or treaties of the United
7 States.

28 U.S.C.

§ 2254(c).

Petitioner fails to allege any

8 claim(s), much less any claims which go to the fact or duration
9 of his confinement.

See Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475, 489

10 (1973).
11
12

Moreover, since Petitioner has failed to name the proper

13 respondent, the name of the state officer having custody over
14 Petitioner (i.e., prison warden), see Stanley v. California
15 Supreme Court, 21 F.3d 359, 360 (9th Cir. 1984); Rule 2(a), Rules
16 Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States Supreme Court,
17 the Court lacks jurisdiction over the Petition.

See Smith v.

18 Idaho, 392 F.3d 350, 352-55 (9th Cir. 2004).
19
20

Since Petitioner does not state a claim for relief under 28

21 U.S.C. § 2254, dismissal of the Petition is warranted.
22 ///
23 ///
24 ///
25 ///
26 ///
27 ///
28 ///
2

1

II.

ORDER

2
3

ACCORDINGLY, IT IS ORDERED that the Petition be dismissed

4 without prejudice.
5
6

LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY.

7
8 DATED: 4/4/17
9
10

_____________________________
DALE S. FISCHER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

11
12
13
14
15 Presented by:
16 Dated: April 3, 2017
17
18
/ s /
ALKA SAGAR
20
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
21
19

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3