Otiker v. Washington State

Filing 7

ORDER; signed by Magistrate Judge David W. Christel.The proper respondent to a habeas petition is the person who has custody over [the petitioner]. Accordingly, the Clerk of Court is directed to substitute Jeffrey A. Uttecht as the Respondent in this action in place of Washington State. **2 PAGE(S), PRINT ALL**(Andrew Otiker, Prisoner ID: 852818)(SP)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT TACOMA

8
9
10

ANDREW OTIKER,
Petitioner,

11

13

ORDER

v.

12

CASE NO. C20-6151 RSL-DWC

WASHINGTON STATE,
Respondent.

14
15
16

Petitioner, who is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed a Petition for Writ of

17 Habeas Corpus (“the Petition”) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Dkt. 5. In his Petition, Petitioner
18 named the State of Washington as Respondent. See id. The proper respondent to a habeas
19 petition is the “person who has custody over [the petitioner].” 28 U.S.C. § 2242; see also § 2243;
20 Brittingham v. United States, 982 F.2d 378 (9th Cir. 1992); Dunne v. Henman, 875 F.2d 244, 249
21 (9th Cir. 1989). According to his Petition, Petitioner is currently confined at Coyote Ridge
22 Corrections Center (“CRCC”) in Connell, Washington. See Dkt. The Superintendent of CRCC is
23 Jeffrey A. Uttecht.
24
ORDER - 1

1

Accordingly, the Clerk of Court is directed to substitute Jeffrey A. Uttecht as the

2 Respondent in this action. The Clerk of Court is also directed to update the case title.
3
4

Dated this 15th day of July, 2021.

5

A

6

David W. Christel
United States Magistrate Judge

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
ORDER - 2