Brandon Leon Bibbs v. Los Angeles Sheriff Dept.

I.

INTRODUCTION

On March 10, 2021, Petitioner Brandon Leon Bibbs (“Bibbs”), who appears to be a detainee at Men’s Central Jail in Los Angeles, California, constructively filed1 a pro se Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (“Petition”) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (“Section 2255”). ECF Docket No. (“Dkt.”) 1. The Petition raises twelve claims, but does not appear to challenge any conviction. Id. As discussed below, the Court orders Bibbs to show cause why the Petition should not be dismissed for failure to (1) name a proper respondent and (2) state a cognizable habeas claim. /// /// /// /// /// /// /// 1 Under the “mailbox rule,” when a pro se prisoner gives prison authorities a pleading to mail to court, the court deems the pleading constructively “filed” on the date it is signed. Roberts v. Marshall, 627 F.3d 768, 770 n.1 (9th Cir. 2010) (citation omitted).

II.

DISCUSSION

A. THE PETITION FAILS TO NAME A PROPER RESPONDENT

1. Applicable Law “[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 (2004) (citations omitted). Thus, “the default rule is that the proper respondent is…