From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bradley v. Curtin

United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Northern Division
Mar 4, 2010
Case No. 1:08-13560-BC (E.D. Mich. Mar. 4, 2010)

Opinion

Case No. 1:08-13560-BC.

March 4, 2010


ORDER GRANTING THE MOTION TO AMEND CAPTION


On August 18, 2008, Petitioner Anthony Bradley filed a pro se application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, challenging his convictions for first-degree felony murder, armed robbery, and possession of a firearm in the commission of a felony. On September 24, 2008, this Court entered an opinion and order granting Petitioner's motion to hold his habeas petition in abeyance pending the completion of state post-conviction proceedings by Petitioner. The Court also administratively closed the case. On March 24, 2009, this Court reinstated the habeas petition upon Petitioner's request and amended the caption to reflect the name of Petitioner's warden at the time of the reinstatement of the petition, Jeffrey Woods. The Court also ordered Respondent to file an answer to the petition for writ of habeas corpus. On September 23, 2009, Respondent filed an answer to the petition.

On April 20, 2009, Petitioner filed a motion to amend the caption based on the fact that he had been transferred to the E.C. Brooks Facility in Muskegon Heights, Michigan. In reviewing the Michigan Department of Corrections' Offender Tracking Information System (OTIS), which this Court is permitted to take judicial notice of, See Ward v. Wolfenbarger, 323 F. Supp. 2d 818, 821 n. 3 (E.D. Mich. 2004), it appears that Petitioner has since been transferred to the Oaks Correctional Facility in Manistee, Michigan.

The only proper Respondent in a habeas case is the habeas Petitioner's custodian, which in the case of an incarcerated habeas Petitioner would be the warden. See Edwards Johns, 450 F. Supp. 2d 755, 757 (E.D. Mich. 2006) (citing Hogan v. Hanks, 97 F. 3d 189, 190 (7th Cir. 1996)); see also Rule 2(a), 28 foll. U.S.C. § 2254. The warden at Oaks Correctional Facility is Cindi Curtin.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Petitioner's motion to amend the caption [Dkt. # 8] is GRANTED.

The clerk is DIRECTED to amend the caption to " Anthony Bradley v. Cindi Curtin."


Summaries of

Bradley v. Curtin

United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Northern Division
Mar 4, 2010
Case No. 1:08-13560-BC (E.D. Mich. Mar. 4, 2010)
Case details for

Bradley v. Curtin

Case Details

Full title:ANTHONY BRADLEY, Petitioner, v. CINDI CURTIN, Respondent

Court:United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Northern Division

Date published: Mar 4, 2010

Citations

Case No. 1:08-13560-BC (E.D. Mich. Mar. 4, 2010)