Opinion
2:19-cv-2524 DAD AC P
03-24-2023
BENJAMIN JUSTIN BROWNLEE, Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, Respondent.
ORDER
ALLISON CLAIRE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a motion requesting that the court order his trial attorney and appellate counsel or the state court to provide him with copies of his state court records that were lost during a transfer to another prison. ECF No. 24.
To the extent petitioner appears to be seeking an order from the court directing the state courts to provide him with copies of his state court records, “[t]he federal courts are without power to issue writs of mandamus to direct state courts or their judicial officers in the performance of their duties.” Clark v. Washington, 366 F.2d 678, 681 (1966) (citations omitted); Demos v. United States Dist. Ct., 925 F.2d 1160, 1161 (9th Cir. 1991) (“[T]his court lacks jurisdiction to issue a writ of mandamus to a state court.” (citing 28 U.S.C. § 1651)). With respect to petitioner's prior counsel, they are not parties to this case and the court therefore lacks the personal jurisdiction necessary to compel them to provide petitioner with copies. See Ruhrgas AG v. Marathon Oil Co., 526 U.S. 574, 584 (1999) (“Personal jurisdiction . . . ‘represents a restriction on judicial power . . . as a matter of individual liberty.'” (second alteration in original) (quoting Ins. Corp. of Ireland v. Compagnie des Bauxites de Guinee, 456 U.S. 694, 702 (1982)). Although the court is sympathetic to petitioner's plight, it is without authority to order the relief requested and the motion must be denied.
The court notes that the opinion in petitioner's direct appeal may be available to him though the prison law library. See People v. Brownlee, 2019 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 2635; 2019 WL 1613558.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that petitioner's motion for copies (ECF No. 24) is DENIED.