Schmidt
Schmidt v. Jaime
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
DEVIN LEE JAMES SCHMIDT,
Case No. 20-cv-00219-YGR (PR) Petitioner, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE v. 8 RALPH DIAZ, Secretary of California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (“CDCR”), 10 Respondent. 11 Petitioner, a state parolee, has filed this pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant 12 to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. He has paid the full filing fee. 13 The rules governing relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 require a person in custody pursuant to 14 the judgment of a state court to name the “‘state officer having custody’” of him as the respondent. 15 Ortiz-Sandoval v. Gomez, 81 F.3d 891, 894 (9th Cir. 1996) (quoting Rule 2(a) of the Rules 16 Governing Habeas Corpus Cases Under Section 2254). This person typically is the warden of the 17 facility in which the petitioner is incarcerated. See Stanley v. California Supreme Court, 21 F.3d 18 359, 360 (9th Cir. 1994). Failure to name the petitioner’s custodian as a respondent deprives 19 federal courts of personal jurisdiction, see id., but…