From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Carrillo v. Placer County Superior Court

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California
Jul 15, 2015
2:15-cv-1461-EFB P (E.D. Cal. Jul. 15, 2015)

Opinion


RAY CARRILLO, Petitioner, v. PLACER COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT, Respondent. No. 2:15-cv-1461-EFB P United States District Court, E.D. California. July 15, 2015

          ORDER

          EDMUND F. BRENNAN, Magistrate Judge.

         Petitioner is a state prisoner without counsel seeking a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. He seeks leave to proceed in forma pauperis. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). Examination of the in forma pauperis affidavit reveals that petitioner is unable to afford the costs of suit. Therefore, the request is granted. To proceed further, however, petitioner must file an amended petition.

This proceeding was referred to this court by Local Rule 302 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and is before the undersigned pursuant to petitioner's consent. See 28 U.S.C. § 636; see also E.D. Cal. Local Rules, Appx. A, at (k)(4).

         Under Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, the court must review all petitions for writ of habeas corpus and summarily dismiss any petition if it is plain that the petitioner is not entitled to relief. The court requires that all petitions for writs of habeas corpus be filed on the proper form, which is provided by this court. L.R. 190(b); see also Rule 2(c)-(d), Fed. R. Governing § 2254 Cases.

         Here, petitioner has used the proper form but he has not properly completed it by responding to the questions raised therein. As drafted, the court cannot determine the nature of petitioner's intended grounds for relief or discharge its duty under Rule 4. See L.R. 190(e); Rule 2(c), Fed. R. Governing § 2254 Cases. Thus, petitioner must re-file his petition on the proper form and clearly identify his intended claims for relief.

         In addition, the court notes that petitioner has named the Placer County Superior Court as respondent. A petitioner seeking a writ of habeas corpus must name as respondent the person having custody over him. 28 U.S.C. § 2242; Rule 2(a), Fed. R. Governing § 2254 Cases. This person ordinarily is the warden of the facility where petitioner is confined. See Stanley v. California Supreme Court, 21 F.3d 359, 360 (9th Cir. 1994). Because petitioner has not named the proper respondent, petitioner will be provided leave to amend to correct this technical defect. See Stanley, 21 F.3d at 360.

         Accordingly, it is ORDERED that:

         1. The petition (ECF No. 1) is dismissed with leave to file an amended petition within 30 days of the date of this order. Any amended petition must be filed on the form employed by this court and must state all claims and prayers for relief on the form. It must bear the case number assigned to this action and must bear the title "Amended Petition." Petitioner is cautioned that failure to file an amended petition pursuant to this order may result in the dismissal of this action;

         2. The Clerk of the Court is directed to send petitioner the court's form for application for writ of habeas corpus; and

         3. Petitioner's application to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 4) is granted.


Summaries of

Carrillo v. Placer County Superior Court

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California
Jul 15, 2015
2:15-cv-1461-EFB P (E.D. Cal. Jul. 15, 2015)
Case details for

Carrillo v. Placer County Superior Court

Case Details

Full title:RAY CARRILLO, Petitioner, v. PLACER COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT, Respondent.

Court:United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California

Date published: Jul 15, 2015

Citations

2:15-cv-1461-EFB P (E.D. Cal. Jul. 15, 2015)