Torres v. The People of the State of California

Filing 22

ORDER DIRECTING Clerk of Court to Substitute Warden Clark as the Respondent in this Action re 21 Motion to amend to change name of Respondent, signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck on 7/28/2010. (Marrujo, C)

Download PDF
(HC) Torres v. The People of the State of California Doc. 22 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 10 11 12 KEN CLARK, 13 Respondent. 14 15 Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a Petition For Writ Of Habeas Corpus 16 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2254. 17 When the petition was initially filed, Petitioner named the State of California as 18 Respondent. A petitioner filing a petition for writ of habeas corpus must name the state officer 19 who has custody of the petitioner as the respondent. Rule 2 (a) of the Rules Governing 2254 20 cases; Ortiz-Sandoval v. Gomez, 81 F.3d 891, 894 (9th Cir. 1996). Normally, the person having 21 custody of an incarcerated petitioner is the warden of the prison in which the petitioner is 22 incarcerated because the warden has "day-to-day control over" the petitioner. Brittingham v. 23 United States, 982 F.2d 378, 379 (9th Cir. 1992); see also Stanley v. California Supreme Court, 24 21 F.3d 359, 360 (9th Cir. 1994). 25 On April 23, 2010, the Court issued an Order To Show Cause why the petition should not 26 be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction in that Petitioner had not named a proper Respondent. On 27 July 14, 2010, Petitioner filed a notice naming Warden Clark as the Respondent. 28 1 Dockets.Justia.com UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SERGIO T. TORRES, Petitioner, v. 1:10-cv-00339-DLB (HC) ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO CHANGE NAME OF RESPONDENT [Doc. 21] / 1 2 3 4 3b142a 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Accordingly, the Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to substitute Warden Clark as the Respondent in this action. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: July 28, 2010 /s/ Dennis L. Beck UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?