The opinion
1
2
3
4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
5
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
6
7 GIOVANNI CENTENO SOZA, Case No. 1:26-cv-00737-KES-SAB-HC
8 Petitioner, ORDER RE: NEXT FRIEND HABEAS
JURISDICTION
9 v.
ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT
10 WARDEN OF CALIFORNIA CITY TO UPDATE PETITIONER’S ADDRESS,
DETENTION FACILITY, MAIL PETITIONER GIOVANNI CENTENO
11 SOZA COPY OF PETITION AND THIS
Respondent. ORDER, AND MAIL EFRAIN ENRIQUE
12 CENTENO SOZA A COPY OF THIS
ORDER
13
14 On January 22, 2028, the instant federal habeas petition was filed in the United States
15 District Court for the Central District of California. (ECF No. 1.) As the petition challenges the
16 detention of Giovanni Centeno Soza (“Petitioner”) at the California City Detention Facility,
17 which is located in the Eastern District of California, the petition was transferred to this Court.
18 (ECF No. 5.)
19 The petition submitted to the Court was completed and signed by Petitioner’s brother,
20 Efrain Enrique Centeno Soza (“Mr. Centeno Soza”). (ECF No. 1 at 1.1) “‘[N]ext friends’ appear
21 in court on behalf of detained prisoners who are unable, usually because of mental incompetence
22 or inaccessibility, to seek relief themselves.” Whitmore v. Arkansas, 495 U.S. 149, 162 (1990)
23 (citing United States ex rel. Toth v. Quarles, 350 U.S. 11, 13, n.3 (1955)). However, “‘next
24 friend’ standing is by no means granted automatically to whomever seeks to pursue an action on
25 behalf of another.” Whitmore, 495 U.S. at 163. In order to establish standing, the next friend
26 must: (1) “provide an adequate explanation—such as inaccessibility, mental incompetence, or
27 other disability—why the real party in interest cannot appear on his own behalf to prosecute the
1 action”; and (2) “be truly dedicated to the best interests of the person on whose behalf he seeks to
2 litigate.” Whitmore, 495 U.S. at 163 (internal citations omitted). “The burden is on the ‘next
3 friend’ clearly to establish the propriety of his status and thereby justify the jurisdiction of the
4 court.” Id. at 164.
5 “Although the federal habeas corpus statute permits a ‘next friend’ to pursue a habeas
6 action on behalf of another in certain circumstances, see 28 U.S.C. § 2246, the statute does not
7 authorize the ‘next friend’ to proceed without an attorney.” United States v. Caputo, No. 1:14-cr-
8 00041-JLT-SKO-1, 2023 WL 5207318, at *5 (E.D. Cal. Aug. 14, 2023). See Hinojosa v.
9 Warden, SATF/SP, No. 2:22-cv-1780 DB P, 2023 WL 2874169, at *2 (E.D. Cal. Apr. 10, 2023)
10 (“[E]ven if Mr. Bland’s motion for ‘next friend’ status were granted, he would have to be
11 represented by counsel in order to proceed as a ‘next friend’ because pro se litigants have no
12 authority to represent anyone other than themselves.”), report and recommendation adopted,
13 2023 WL 4711303 (E.D. Cal. July 24, 2023). Additionally, the Local Rules of Practice for the
14 United States District Court, Eastern District of California provide in pertinent part:
15 Any individual who is representing himself or herself without an attorney must
appear personally or by courtesy appearance by an attorney admitted to the Bar of
16 this Court and may not delegate that duty to any other individual, including
husband or wife, or any other party on the same side appearing without an
17 attorney. Any individual representing himself or herself without an attorney is
bound by the Federal Rules of Civil or Criminal Procedure, these Rules, and all
18 other applicable law. All obligations placed on “counsel” by these Rules apply to
individuals appearing in propria persona. Failure to comply therewith may be
19 ground for dismissal, judgment by default, or any other sanction appropriate
under these Rules. A corporation or other entity may appear only by an attorney.
20
21 L.R. 183(a). “Thus, in an action in which the sole plaintiff is incapacitated and cannot proceed
22 pro se, the plaintiff must be represented by competent counsel, or alternatively, the action must
23 be dismissed without prejudice.” Complot v. JP Morgan Chase Bank, No. CV-23-02348-PHX-
24 DWL, 2023 WL 8234271, at *3 (D. Ariz. Nov. 28, 2023) (citing Johns v. Cnty. of San Diego,
25 114 F.3d 874, 877 (9th Cir. 1997)).
26 Assuming that Mr. Centeno Soza qualifies for next-friend status, which would permit him
27 to initiate the instant petition on behalf of brother, it does not allow Mr. Centeno Soza to
1 | secure licensed counsel to proceed, or (2) Petitioner Giovanni Centeno Soza must notify the
2 | Court in writing that he will appear on his own behalf to prosecute this habeas action.
3 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
4 1. Within THIRTY (30) days from the date of service of this order, either:
5 (a) Petitioner Giovanni Centeno Soza should notify the Court in writing that: (a) his
6 brother filed the instant federal habeas petition with his knowledge and permission,
7 (b) he declares under penalty of perjury that the contents of the petition are true and
8 correct, and (c) going forward he will appear on his own behalf to prosecute this
9 habeas action; OR
10 (b) Mr. Efrain Enrique Centeno Soza should secure licensed counsel to proceed” and
11 said counsel shall file a notice of appearance in this matter;
12 2. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to:
13 a. Update Petitioner’s address to:
14 California City Detention Facility
22844 Virginia Boulevard
15 California City, CA 93505
16 b. Send Petitioner Giovanni Centeno Soza a copy of the petition (ECF No. 1) along
17 with a copy of this order; and
18 c. Send Mr. Efrain Enrique Centeno Soza a copy of this order at the address listed
19 on page 4 of the petition (ECF No. | at 4).
20 3. Failure to comply with this order will result in a recommendation of dismissal for failure
21 to comply with a Court order.
22
73 IT IS SO ORDERED. OF. nf Se
24 | Dated: _ January 29, 2026 _ OO
STANLEY A. BOONE
25 United States Magistrate Judge
26
27 |
2 Mr. Efrain Enrique Centeno Soza may contact the Office of the Federal Public Defender for the Eastern District of
28 | California for assistance.