Barger v. CDCR Director et al
Filing
15
ORDER Denying Petitioner's 13 Motion to Change Respondent's Name; ORDER Denying 14 Motion to Augment the Record; ORDER Granting Petitioner's Motions for Extension of Time to File Amended Petition; ORDER Directing Clerk of the Court to Send Petitioner a Blank Sec. 2254 Form signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 05/20/2015. Amended Petition due by 6/22/2015. (Attachments: # 1 2254 Writ of Habeas Corpus)(Flores, E)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
GARY DALE BARGER,
12
Petitioner,
13
14
15
v.
CDCR DIRECTOR, et al.,
Respondents.
16
17
18
19
20
21
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No.: 1:15-cv-00306-JLT
ORDER DENYING PETITIONER’S MOTION TO
CHANGE RESPONDENT’S NAME (Doc. 13)
ORDER DENYING PETITIONER’S MOTION TO
AUGMENT THE RECORD (Doc. 14)
ORDER GRANTING PETITIONER’S MOTIONS
FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE AMENDED
PETITION (Docs. 13 & 14)
ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF THE COURT TO
SEND PETITIONER A BLANK SEC. 2254 FORM
THIRTY DAY DEADLINE
This petition was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California and
22
transferred to this Court on February 25, 2015. (Docs. 1; 4; 5). After conducting a preliminary
23
screening of the petition, the Court, on March 5, 2015, issued an order requiring Petitioner to file a first
24
amended petition because (1) Petitioner’s claims were unintelligible; (2) Petitioner had not provided
25
sufficient information to determine whether the claims in the petition were exhausted; and (3) it
26
appeared that the petition may be untimely and additional information was required from Petitioner to
27
make a final determination. (Doc. 8). The Court granted Petitioner thirty days within which to file an
28
amended petition.
1
On March 23, 2015, Petitioner filed a virtually unintelligible motion that appears to request
1
2
three things: (1) that the Court change the name of Respondent to Ventura Superior Court; (2) that the
3
Court augment the record in some unspecified way; and (3) that Petitioner be granted an additional
4
thirty days within which to file his amended petition. (Doc. 9). On March 30, 2015, Petitioner filed a
5
motion for change of venue to the Ventura County Superior Court. (Doc. 11).
On April 17, 2015, the Court granted the request for an extension of time to file the amended
6
7
petition, but denied all other motions. (Doc. 12). On May 6, 2015, Petitioner filed yet another motion
8
to change the name of the Respondent, a motion to augment the record, and another request for an
9
extension of time to file the amended petition. (Docs. 13 & 14).
DISCUSSION
10
11
A.
Name of Respondent
12
Petitioner has once again requested that this Court permit him to change the name of the
13
Respondent to “California Criminal Justice System Employees.” (Doc. 13). As the Court has already
14
explained, the only respondent over whom this Court can exert habeas jurisdiction is the warden of
15
Petitioner’s current place of incarceration. If the name of Respondent is changed to any other
16
individual, the Court would lack jurisdiction and have to dismiss the petition. Accordingly, that motion
17
will be denied.
18
B.
Augmenting the Record
19
Petitioner’s second request to expand the record is as unintelligible as his first motion.
20
Petitioner provides no details of what documents or evidence he wishes to have included in the record.
21
Moreover, the usual procedure in federal habeas cases is to require Respondent to file the entire record
22
if and when the Court determines that an answer to the petition must be filed. Accordingly, until
23
Petitioner can articulate specific details and grounds justifying a deviation from the normal procedures
24
the Court employees in these types of cases, Petitioner’s requests to expand the record will be denied.
25
C.
26
Extension of Time
Petitioner appears to have requested a second extension of time of thirty days within which to
27
file his first amended petition. The Court will grant the requested extension; however, no further
28
extensions will be granted.
2
ORDER
1
2
Accordingly, the Court ORDERS:
3
1.
Petitioner’s motion for change of Respondent’s name (Doc. 13), is DENIED;
4
2.
Petitioner’s motion to augment the record (Doc. 14), is DENIED;
5
3.
Petitioner’s motion for an extension of time to file a first amended petition (Docs. 13 &
6
14) is GRANTED. Petitioner is granted thirty days from the date of service of this order within
7
which to file his amended petition. No further extensions of time will be granted.
8
4. The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to send Petitioner a blank Sec. 2254 form petition.
9
Petitioner is forewarned that failure to comply with this order will result in a
10
recommendation to dismiss the petition.
11
12
13
14
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
May 20, 2015
/s/ Jennifer L. Thurston
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
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?