From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Dixon v. State

United States District Court, E.D. California
Apr 20, 2007
No. CIV S-07-0549-FCD-CMK-P (E.D. Cal. Apr. 20, 2007)

Opinion

No. CIV S-07-0549-FCD-CMK-P.

April 20, 2007


ORDER


Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Pending before the court is petitioner's petition for a writ of habeas corpus (Doc. 1), filed on March 21, 2007. "A petitioner for habeas corpus relief must name the state officer having custody of him or her as the respondent to the petition."Stanley v. California Supreme Court, 21 F.3d 359, 360 (9th Cir. 1994); see also Rule 2(a), Federal Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases. Here, petitioner names as respondents the State of California and the Attorney General of California. Because petitioner has not named the appropriate state officer, the petition must be dismissed with leave to amend to name the correct respondent. See Stanley, 21 F.3d at 360. Petitioner is warned that failure to comply with this order may result in the dismissal of this action. See Local Rule 11-110.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Petitioner's petition for writ of habeas corpus is dismissed with leave to amend;

2. Petitioner shall file an amended petition on the form employed by this court, and which names the proper respondent and states all claims and requests for relief, within 30 days of the date of this order; and

3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to send petitioner the court's form habeas corpus application.


Summaries of

Dixon v. State

United States District Court, E.D. California
Apr 20, 2007
No. CIV S-07-0549-FCD-CMK-P (E.D. Cal. Apr. 20, 2007)
Case details for

Dixon v. State

Case Details

Full title:RANDALL VEIN DIXON, Petitioner, v. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al., Respondents

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

Date published: Apr 20, 2007

Citations

No. CIV S-07-0549-FCD-CMK-P (E.D. Cal. Apr. 20, 2007)