STANKO v. OBAMA et al

Filing 4

ORDER granting 2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis; sole proper custodian is petitioner's custodian Warden Charles Locket; other designated as co-respondenst are not Mr. Stanko's custodian,and are stricken from the docket and from the caption; request for admissions filed by petitioner(dkt3) is of no effect. Signed by Judge William T. Lawrence on 2/24/2010. (VS) Modified on 3/3/2010 (VS).

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA RUDY STANKO, Petitioner, v. WARDEN CHARLES LOCKET, Respondent. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No. 2:10-cv-49-WTL-JMS

Entry Concerning Selected Matters The court, having considered the above action and the matters which are pending, makes the following rulings: 1. The sole proper custodian in a habeas action is the petitioner's custodian. alMarri v. Rumsfeld, 360 F.3d 707, 709 (7th Cir. 2004). A custodian "is the person having a day-to-day control over the prisoner. That person is the only one who can produce `the body' of the petitioner." Guerra v. Meese, 786 F.2d 414, 416 (D.C.Cir. 1986) (Parole Commission is not custodian despite its power to release petitioner). Warden Locket is petitioner Stanko's custodian and is among the designated respondents. The others designated as co-respondents are not Mr. Stanko's custodian, are not properly named as such in this case, and are stricken from the docket and from the caption. 2. The petitioner's request to proceed in forma pauperis is granted.

3. The request for admissions filed by the petitioner (dkt 3) is of no effect. Discovery in habeas corpus actions may be conducted only upon leave of court and upon a showing of good cause. That step has not been requested here and discovery has not been authorized. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Date: 02/24/2010 Distribution: Rudy Stanko #18259-013 Terre Haute - FCI P.O. Box 33 Terre Haute, IN 47808 _______________________________ Hon. William T. Lawrence, Judge United States District Court Southern District of Indiana