(HC) Diaz v. State of California

District Court, E.D. California·Decided March 5, 2024·No. 1:23-cv-01783·Unknown

Opinion

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10

11 ANTONIO DIAZ, Case No. 1:23-cv-01783-NODJ-SKO-HC

12 Petitioner, ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND VACATING 13 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

14 v. ORDER GRANTING PETITIONER’S MOTION TO AMEND PETITION TO 15 NAME A PROPER RESPONDENT

16 RYAN ANDERSON, Warden, ORDER SUBSTITUTING RYAN ANDERSON AS RESPONDENT IN THIS 17 Respondent. MATTER

18 19 On December 29, 2023, Petitioner filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus in this Court. 20 The Court issued an order directing Petitioner to amend the Respondent. (Doc. 4.) Petitioner was 21 granted thirty (30) days to comply with the court order, and he was advised that failure to comply 22 would result in a recommendation that the petition be dismissed. More than thirty (30) days 23 passed, and Petitioner did not comply. Therefore, on February 13, 2024, the Court issued 24 Findings and Recommendations to dismiss the petition for lack of jurisdiction and failure to 25 comply with a court order. (Doc. 7.) 26 On February 29, 2024, Petitioner filed a motion for reconsideration. (Doc. 8.) He states 27 he does not read or write English but has the assistance of another inmate. He asks that he be 1 Prison. Good cause having been presented, the Court will grant Petitioner’s motion. Petitioner 2 has named the proper respondent since Ryan Anderson is the warden at his institution and he has 3 “day-to-day control over” the petitioner. Brittingham v. United States, 982 F.2d 378, 379 (9th 4 Cir. 1992). 5 ORDER 6 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 7 1) Petitioner’s motion for reconsideration (Doc. 8) is GRANTED; 8 2) The Findings and Recommendations of February 13, 2024, (Doc. 7) are VACATED; 9 3) Petitioner’s motion to amend and name a proper respondent is GRANTED; and 10 4) Ryan Anderson, Warden, is hereby SUBSTITUTED as Respondent in this matter. 11 IT IS SO ORDERED. 12

13 Dated: March 4, 2024 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto . UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 14

15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

(HC) Diaz v. State of California, (E.D. Cal. 2024).

(HC) Diaz v. State of California ((HC) Diaz v. State of California) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Mark Brittingham v. United States
982 F.2d 378 (Ninth Circuit, 1992)