From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Isgrigg v. DCDR

United States District Court, E.D. California
Nov 20, 2009
No. CIV S-09-0136-CMK-P (E.D. Cal. Nov. 20, 2009)

Opinion

No. CIV S-09-0136-CMK-P.

November 20, 2009


ORDER


Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner has consented to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) and no other party has been served or appeared in the action. Pending before the court is petitioner's petition for a writ of habeas corpus (Doc. 1).

"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. 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 (Doc. 1) 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

Isgrigg v. DCDR

United States District Court, E.D. California
Nov 20, 2009
No. CIV S-09-0136-CMK-P (E.D. Cal. Nov. 20, 2009)
Case details for

Isgrigg v. DCDR

Case Details

Full title:RICHARD L. ISGRIGG, III, Petitioner, v. DCDR, et al., Respondents

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

Date published: Nov 20, 2009

Citations

No. CIV S-09-0136-CMK-P (E.D. Cal. Nov. 20, 2009)