IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
July 31, 2008
TITENESHA RUSSELL, PETITIONER,
Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, together with a request to proceed in forma pauperis.
Examination of the affidavit reveals petitioner is unable to afford the costs of this action. Accordingly, leave to proceed in forma pauperis is granted. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a).
"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) (citing Rule 2(a), 28 U.S.C. foll. § 2254). Petitioner has not named a respondent in this action. For this reason, the petition must be dismissed with leave to amend. See Stanley, 21 F.3d at 360.
In addition, petitioner has failed to specify the grounds for relief in her petition. See Rule 2(c), Rules Governing § 2254 Cases. For this additional reason, the petition must be dismissed with leave to amend.
In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Petitioner's July 3, 2008 application to proceed in forma pauperis is granted;
2. Petitioner's application for writ of habeas corpus is dismissed with leave to amend;
3. Within thirty days from the date of this order, petitioner shall complete the attached Notice of Amendment and submit the following documents to the court:
a. The completed Notice of Amendment; and
b. An original and one copy of the Amended Petition.
4. Any amended petition must bear the case number assigned to this action and the title "Amended Petition"; and
5. The Clerk of the Court is directed to send petitioner the court's form for application for writ of habeas corpus.
NOTICE OF AMENDMENT
Petitioner hereby submits the following document in compliance with the court's order filed
© 1992-2008 VersusLaw Inc.