Coutts v. State of Nebraska
Filing
9
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER that the Plaintiff shall have 30 days from the date of this Memorandum and Order to file an amended petition for writ of habeas corpus naming the current warden of Petitioner's place of confinement as the respondent. In the alternative, Plaintiff may file a motion to substitute party. The clerk's office is directed to set the following pro se case management deadline: December 9, 2013: Deadline for the petitioner to name proper respondent. Ordered by Chief Judge Laurie Smith Camp. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(ADB)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
JAMES A. COUTTS,
Petitioner,
v.
STATE OF NEBRASKA,
Respondent.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
CASE NO. 4:13CV3144
MEMORANDUM
AND ORDER
Petitioner has filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant 28 U.S.C. § 2254.
(Filing No. 1.) Rule 2(a) of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States
District Courts states that “if the petitioner is currently in custody under a state-court
judgment, the petition must name as respondent the state officer who has custody.” In
habeas corpus challenges to present physical confinement, the default rule is that the
proper respondent is the warden of the facility where the prisoner is being held. Rumsfeld
v. Padilla, 542 U.S. 426, 434 (2005).
Petitioner has named the State of Nebraska as Respondent in this matter. The
State of Nebraska is not the proper respondent in this case. In order for this matter to
proceed, Petitioner must file an amended petition for writ of habeas corpus naming the
current warden of Petitioner’s place of confinement as the respondent. In the alternative,
Plaintiff may file a motion to substitute party in which he asks the court to substitute the
current warden of his present place of confinement as the respondent.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that:
1.
On the court’s own motion, Plaintiff shall have 30 days from the date of this
Memorandum and Order to file an amended petition for writ of habeas
corpus naming the current warden of Petitioner’s place of confinement as the
respondent. In the alternative, Plaintiff may file a motion to substitute party
in which he asks the court to substitute the current warden at his present
place of confinement as the respondent. Failure to do so may result in
dismissal of this matter without further notice; and
2.
The clerk’s office is directed to set the following pro se case management
deadline: December 9, 2013: Deadline for the petitioner to name proper
respondent.
DATED this 7th day of November, 2013.
BY THE COURT:
s/Laurie Smith Camp
Chief United States District Judge
*This opinion may contain hyperlinks to other documents or Web sites. The U.S.
District Court for the District of Nebraska does not endorse, recommend, approve, or
guarantee any third parties or the services or products they provide on their Web sites.
Likewise, the court has no agreements with any of these third parties or their Web sites.
The court accepts no responsibility for the availability or functionality of any hyperlink.
Thus, the fact that a hyperlink ceases to work or directs the user to some other site does
not affect the opinion of the court.
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?