From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Baker v. Curry

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, N.D. California
Feb 2, 2009
C 07-06289 CW (PR) (N.D. Cal. Feb. 2, 2009)

Opinion


FREDERICK LEE BAKER, Petitioner, v. BEN CURRY, Warden, Respondent. No. C 07-06289 CW (PR) United States District Court, N.D. California. February 2, 2009

          ORDER (1) DIRECTING RESPONDENT TO FILE RESPONSE TO PETITIONER'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND PETITION; (2) ADDRESSING ISSUE INVOLVING TRANSFER OF PETITIONER'S PRIOR HABEAS ACTION IN THE CENTRAL DISTRICT TO THIS COURT

          CLAUDIA WILKEN, District Judge.

         On December 12, 2007, Petitioner, a state prisoner, filed this petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The Court issued an order requiring Respondent to show cause why the petition for a writ of habeas corpus should not be granted. On July 14, 2008, Respondent filed a motion to dismiss the petition. Petitioner filed an opposition, and Respondent filed a reply.

         Before the Court is Petitioner's "Motion for Permission for Leave to Amend the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)" (docket no. 26) in which Petitioner seeks to amend his petition "to include exhaustion of state appellate court remedies...." (Mot. to Am. Pet. at 1.) Attached to Petitioner's motion is the October 10, 2008 decision by the California Court of Appeal denying his state habeas petition. (Mot. to Am. Pet., Ex. Z(2).) Also attached is Petitioner's state habeas petition filed in the appellate court on September 30, 2008. (Id.)

         The certificate of service shows the motion for leave to amend the petition was served on the Office of the Attorney General. Respondent shall file a response to the motion for leave to amend the petition within fourteen (14) days of the date of this Order. Petitioner may file a reply within thirty (30) days of the date of his receipt of the response.

         The Court further notes that in 2006 Petitioner filed a habeas action in the United States District Court for the Central District of California. See Baker v. Kane, No. 06-cv-01323-JSL-MAN (C.D. Cal. Nov. 25, 2006) (habeas petition filed). In an Order dated December 4, 2006, Magistrate Judge Margaret A. Nagle transferred Petitioner's prior habeas action to this Court. (Dec. 4, 2006 Transfer Order in Central District Case No. 06-cv-01323-JSL-MAN.) However, to date, that action has not been transferred to this Court. Therefore, this matter must be corrected. Pursuant to Magistrate Judge Nagle's December 4, 2006 Order, the Clerk of the Central District Court of California is ordered to TRANSFER Petitioner's prior action filed under Central District Case No. 06-cv-01323-JSL-MAN forthwith to this Court.

         The Clerk of the Court is directed to send a copy of this Order to the Clerk of the Central District Court of California.

         IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Baker v. Curry

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, N.D. California
Feb 2, 2009
C 07-06289 CW (PR) (N.D. Cal. Feb. 2, 2009)
Case details for

Baker v. Curry

Case Details

Full title:FREDERICK LEE BAKER, Petitioner, v. BEN CURRY, Warden, Respondent.

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

Date published: Feb 2, 2009

Citations

C 07-06289 CW (PR) (N.D. Cal. Feb. 2, 2009)