(HC) Whitsitt v. State of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 WILLIAM J. WHITSITT, Case No. 2:21-cv-02019-JDP (HC) Petitioner, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

THAT THE AMENDED PETITION BE

v. DISMISSED STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ECF No. 22 Respondent. 14 Petitioner, proceeding without counsel, seeks a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. He is a pretrial detainee and argues that the state has violated his rights by holding him for over ten months “for competency-treatment training.” ECF No. 22 at 3. I find, for the reasons stated below, that Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 (1971) requires that I abstain from considering petitioner’s claims. The amended petition is before me for preliminary review under Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2241 Cases. Under Rule 4, the judge assigned to the habeas proceeding must examine the habeas petition and order a response unless it “plainly appears” that the petitioner is not entitled to relief. See Valdez v. Montgomery,…