(HC) Ramirez v. Allen

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

PETER TORRES RAMIREZ, Case No. 1:22-cv-01060-SKO-HC

Petitioner, ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO AMEND TO NAME A PROPER RESPONDENT v. [Doc. No. 13]

TRENT ALLEN, Acting Warden, ORDER SUBSTITUTING TRENT ALLEN AS RESPONDENT IN THIS MATTER Respondent. ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR [Doc. 12]

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On August 18, 2022, Petitioner filed a federal petition for writ of habeas corpus. He named the People of the State of California as Respondent in this matter. On August 25, 2022, the Court advised Petitioner that he had failed to name a proper respondent. Petitioner was granted leave to file a motion to amend to name a proper respondent. On September 30, 2022, Petitioner filed a motion to amend the petition to name Trent Allen as Respondent in this matter. Petitioner has named the proper respondent since Trent Allen is the acting warden at his institution and he has “day-to-day control over” the petitioner. Brittingham v. United States, 982 F.2d 378, 379 (9th Cir. 1992). absolute right to appointment of counsel in habeas proceedings. See, e.g., Anderson v. Heinze, 258 F.2d 479, 481 (9th Cir. 1958); Mitchell v. Wyrick, 727 F.2d 773, 774 (8th Cir. 1984). However, Title 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2)(B) authorizes the appointment of counsel at any stage of the case if "the interests of justice so require." See Rule 8(c), Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases. In the present case, the Court does not find that the interests of justice require the appointment of counsel at the present time. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 1) Petitioner’s motion to amend and name a proper respondent is GRANTED; 2) Trent Allen, Acting Warden, is hereby SUBSTITUTED as Respondent in this matter; and 3) Petitioner’s motion for counsel is DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 3, 2022 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto . UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE