Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Lewis v. People

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


July 26, 2010

RHONDA LEWIS, PETITIONER,
v.
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, RESPONDENT.

ORDER

Petitioner is a state prisoner without counsel seeking a writ of habeas corpus. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254. She seeks leave to proceed in forma pauperis. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915.

Examination of the in forma pauperis affidavit reveals that petitioner is unable to afford the costs of suit.

A petitioner seeking a writ of habeas corpus must name as respondent the person having custody over her. 28 U.S.C. § 2242; Rule 2(a), Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases. This person ordinarily is the warden of the facility where petitioner is confined. See Stanley v. California Supreme Court, 21 F.3d 359, 360 (9th Cir. 1994). Petitioner names as respondent the People of the State of California, who do not have custody over petitioner. Petitioner has not named the proper respondent.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that:

1. Petitioner's request for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is granted; and

2. The January 14, 2010 petition is dismissed with leave to file an amended petition naming the proper respondent within 30 days of the date of this order. Petitioner's failure to file an amended petition will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed without prejudice. The Clerk of the Court is directed to send to petitioner the form Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus used in this court.

20100726

© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.