Schmidt v. Jaime
- Yvonne Rogers
- 4:20-cv-00219
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 3
In Schmidt v. Jaime, Judge Rogers substituted Ralph Diaz for George Jaime and ordered responses to Schmidt’s habeas petition.
The order affects Devin Lee James Schmidt’s federal habeas case and substitutes Ralph Diaz, the Secretary of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, for George Jaime as respondent. It requires Diaz and Schmidt to meet specified filing and service deadlines.
What happened
In Schmidt v. Jaime, Devin Lee James Schmidt, a state parolee proceeding without a lawyer, filed a petition challenging his custody under federal habeas law. He named George Jaime, the warden of California City Correctional Facility, as the respondent.
The court explained that a habeas petitioner must name the state official who has custody over him. Because Schmidt was on parole, the court concluded that the proper respondent was Ralph Diaz, the Secretary of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, and substituted Diaz for Jaime.
The court found that the petition did not appear meritless and issued an order requiring Diaz to answer within 60 days or file a motion to dismiss on procedural grounds. Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers also set deadlines for Schmidt’s response and required the parties to keep the court informed of address changes.
The detailed version
- Schmidt v. Jaime · No. 4:20-cv-00219
- Yvonne Rogers
- Mar. 9, 2020
Background
Devin Lee James Schmidt, identified as a state parolee, filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging his custody. He represented himself and paid the full filing fee. The petition named George Jaime, the warden of the California City Correctional Facility, as respondent.
Respondent substitution
The court explained that federal habeas rules generally require a petitioner to name the state officer who has custody over him. That official is usually the warden of the facility where the petitioner is incarcerated, but the rules can also allow the chief officer in charge of the state’s penal institutions to serve as respondent. The court stated that failing to name the proper custodian deprives the federal court of personal jurisdiction, while also noting that habeas petitions are read liberally when determining whether the correct respondent was named.
Because Schmidt was a parolee, the court determined that the appropriate respondent was Ralph Diaz, Secretary of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. The court therefore substituted Diaz for Jaime as respondent.
Order to show cause and case deadlines
The court stated that the petition did not appear meritless. It ordered the clerk to serve the order, petition, and attachments on Diaz, the California Attorney General’s Office, and Schmidt. Diaz was ordered to file and serve an answer within 60 days, along with relevant portions of the state-court record. Instead of an answer, Diaz could file a motion to dismiss on procedural grounds within the same 60-day period.
If Diaz filed a motion to dismiss, Schmidt would have 60 days to respond, and Diaz would have 14 days to file a reply. If Diaz filed an answer, Schmidt would have 60 days after receiving it to file a response. The court also instructed Schmidt to prosecute the case, keep the court and respondent informed of any address change, and serve respondent’s counsel with copies of communications filed with the court. The court noted that, under the local rule, a pro se action may be dismissed without prejudice if court mail is returned as undeliverable and the party does not provide an updated address within the specified period. Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers ordered that Diaz be substituted as respondent.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.