Pratt

(HC) Lemus v. Pratt

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaNovember 6, 20232:23-cv-01968California351 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 RAUL R. LEMUS, No. 2:23-CV-1968-DMC-P Petitioner,

ORDER

v. BUTTE COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT, Respondent. 16 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Pending before the Court is Petitioner’s first amended petition, ECF No. 6. “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. In the original petition, Petitioner named “Butte County Superior Court” as the Respondent. The Court dismissed the original petition with leave to amend to name the correct respondent. In the first amended petition, Petitioner names “CRC Prison” as the Respondent. Because Petitioner still has not named the appropriate state officer, Petitioner will be…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.