Opinion

(HC) Brown v. Northern Kern State Prison

Court
District Court, E.D. California
Filed
May 3, 2022
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 18.1%

The opinion

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

11 KENYON DERRAL BROWN, Case No. 1:21-cv-01061-DAD-HBK (HC)

12 Petitioner, ORDER STRIKING PETITIONER’S

MOTION TO SUPPLEMENT PETITION

13 v.

(Doc. No. 26)

14 NORTHERN KERN STATE PRISON,

DIRECTOR OF CDCR,

15

Respondent.

16

17

18 Petitioner Kenyon Derral Brown, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has pending a

19 petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. (Doc. No. 1). Respondent filed a

20 motion to dismiss the petition on September 1, 2021. (Doc. No. 17). Petitioner responded in

21 opposition on September 16, 2021; and the court granted his motion to supplement his opposition

22 to the motion to dismiss on January 10, 2022. (Doc Nos. 18, 22, 25). On January 7, 2022,

23 Petitioner filed a “Motion to Supplement Conditions of Confinement,” now pending before the

24 Court. (Doc. No. 26).

25 The Supreme Court has instructed the federal courts to liberally construe the “inartful

26 pleading[s]” of pro se litigants. See Boag v. MacDougall, 454 U.S. 364, 365 (1982). However,

27 despite entitling the document at issue a motion to “supplement,” the pleading can only be

28

1 | construed as a stand-alone amended petition for writ of habeas corpus.! Under the circumstances

2 | presented here, Rule 15(a) allows Petitioner to amend his petition once “as a matter of course” up

3 || to 21 days after Respondent’s Motion to Dismiss. Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a). Here, more than three

4 | months have passed since Respondent filed the Motion to Dismiss; thus, Petitioner was required

5 | to obtain leave from the Court or the opposing party’s written consent before filing an amended

6 | petition pursuant to FRCP 15(a). Because Petitioner failed to obtain leave from the Court or

7 | obtain consent from Respondent, the Court will order Petitioner’s “Motion to Supplement

8 | Conditions of Confinement” stricken from the record.

9 This action continues to proceed on Petitioner’s initial petition. Petitioner is advised that

10 | he may file a motion for leave to file an amended petition pursuant to FRCP Rule 15(a). Should

11 | Petitioner seek leave to amend his petition, he is also advised that the amended petition will

12 | supersede the original petition and become the operative pleading. See Lacey v. Maricopa

13 | County, 693 F.3d. 896, 907 n.1 (9th Cir. 2012) (en banc). It must be complete without reference

14 | to the prior petition or any superseded pleading, and must include all grounds for relief and

15 | supporting facts. See also Local Rule 220. The Court does not accept piecemeal pleadings.

16 Accordingly, it is ORDERED:

17 The Clerk of Court shall strike Petitioner’s “Motion to Supplement Conditions of

18 | Confinement” (Doc. No. 26) from the record.

19

70 | Dated: _ May 2, 2022 law Nh. fareh Base □□□

1 HELENA M. BARCH-KUCHTA

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

22

23

24

25

26

———

' Notably if the Court accepted the pleading as an amended pleading it did not include all grounds

28 | raised in the initial petition.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.