Brandon Bibbs v. United States

BACKGROUND

On an unspecified date, Petitioner was charged1 with ten counts of robbery with a firearm. Dkt. 1 at 2. Petitioner is currently “awaiting trial” at Men’s Central Jail in Los Angeles County,

1 Petitioner does not state in what court he was charged. (continued . . . ) where he has been detained since April 22, 2016. Id. at 5. Petitioner seeks “temporary release” pursuant to “18 U.S.C. § 3142(i)(4)2 and the First, Sixth, Eighth and Fourteenth amendments,” based on the following claims: (1) “L.A. County Jail[’s] overpopulation with COVID-19 patients”; (2) “unsanitary jail conditions”; (3) “inadequacy of courts and counsel”; and (4) “safe release conditions.” Dkt. 1 at 1, 10, 11. The only relief Petitioner seeks is “temporary release.” Id. at 1.

III.

DISCUSSION

A. THE PETITION IS SUBJECT TO DISMISSAL BECAUSE PETITIONER FAILS

TO NAME A PROPER RESPONDENT

“[T]he proper respondent to a habeas petition is ‘the person who has custody over [the petitioner].’” Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U.S. 426, 434, 124 S. Ct. 2711, 159 L. Ed. 2d 513 (2004). Thus, “the default rule is that the proper respondent is the warden of the facility where the prisoner is being held.” Id.…