The opinion
1
2
3
4
5
6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9 JORGE LUIS MEDINA GONZALEZ, Case No. 1:26-cv-02576-KES-SAB-HC
10 Petitioner, ORDER RE: NEXT FRIEND HABEAS
JURISDICTION
11 v.
ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT
12 THOMAS GILES, et al., TO MAIL PETITIONER JORGE LUIS
MEDINA GONZALEZ COPY OF PETITION
13 Respondents. AND THIS ORDER, AND MAIL EFRAIN
MARIA GONZALEZ A COPY OF THIS
14 ORDER
15
16 On April 6, 2026, the Court received the instant federal habeas petition, which challenges
17 the detention of Jorge Luis Medina Gonzalez (“Petitioner”) and was completed and signed by
18 Maria Gonzalez (“Ms. Gonzalez”).1 (ECF No. 1.)
19 “‘[N]ext friends’ appear in court on behalf of detained prisoners who are unable, usually
20 because of mental incompetence or inaccessibility, to seek relief themselves.” Whitmore v.
21 Arkansas, 495 U.S. 149, 162 (1990) (citing United States ex rel. Toth v. Quarles, 350 U.S. 11,
22 13, n.3 (1955)). However, “‘next friend’ standing is by no means granted automatically to
23 whomever seeks to pursue an action on behalf of another.” Whitmore, 495 U.S. at 163. In order
24 to establish standing, the next friend must: (1) “provide an adequate explanation—such as
25 inaccessibility, mental incompetence, or other disability—why the real party in interest cannot
26 appear on his own behalf to prosecute the action”; and (2) “be truly dedicated to the best interests
27 of the person on whose behalf he seeks to litigate.” Whitmore, 495 U.S. at 163 (internal citations
1 omitted). “The burden is on the ‘next friend’ clearly to establish the propriety of his status and
2 thereby justify the jurisdiction of the court.” Id. at 164.
3 “Although the federal habeas corpus statute permits a ‘next friend’ to pursue a habeas
4 action on behalf of another in certain circumstances, see 28 U.S.C. § 2246, the statute does not
5 authorize the ‘next friend’ to proceed without an attorney.” United States v. Caputo, No. 1:14-cr-
6 00041-JLT-SKO-1, 2023 WL 5207318, at *5 (E.D. Cal. Aug. 14, 2023). See Hinojosa v.
7 Warden, SATF/SP, No. 2:22-cv-1780 DB P, 2023 WL 2874169, at *2 (E.D. Cal. Apr. 10, 2023)
8 (“[E]ven if Mr. Bland’s motion for ‘next friend’ status were granted, he would have to be
9 represented by counsel in order to proceed as a ‘next friend’ because pro se litigants have no
10 authority to represent anyone other than themselves.”), report and recommendation adopted,
11 2023 WL 4711303 (E.D. Cal. July 24, 2023). Additionally, the Local Rules of Practice for the
12 United States District Court, Eastern District of California provide in pertinent part:
13 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
14 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
15 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
16 other applicable law. All obligations placed on “counsel” by these Rules apply to
individuals appearing in propria persona. Failure to comply therewith may be
17 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.
18
19 L.R. 183(a). “Thus, in an action in which the sole plaintiff is incapacitated and cannot proceed
20 pro se, the plaintiff must be represented by competent counsel, or alternatively, the action must
21 be dismissed without prejudice.” Complot v. JP Morgan Chase Bank, No. CV-23-02348-PHX-
22 DWL, 2023 WL 8234271, at *3 (D. Ariz. Nov. 28, 2023) (citing Johns v. Cnty. of San Diego,
23 114 F.3d 874, 877 (9th Cir. 1997)).
24 Assuming that Ms. Gonzalez qualifies for next-friend status, which would permit her to
25 initiate the instant petition on behalf of Petitioner, it does not allow Ms. Gonzalez to prosecute
26 this action pro se on Petitioner’s behalf. Therefore, either: (1) Ms. Gonzalez must secure licensed
27 counsel to proceed, or (2) Petitioner Jorge Luis Medina Gonzalez must notify the Court in
] Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
2 1. Within THIRTY (30) days from the date of service of this order, either:
3 a. Petitioner Jorge Luis Medina Gonzalez should notify the Court in writing that:
4 i. Ms. Gonzalez filed the instant federal habeas petition with his knowledge
5 and permission,
6 ii. he declares under penalty of perjury that the contents of the petition are
7 true and correct, and
8 iil. going forward he will appear on his own behalf to prosecute this habeas
9 action; OR
10 b. Ms. Gonzalez should secure licensed counsel to proceed” and said counsel shall
11 file a notice of appearance in this matter;
12 2. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to:
13 a. Send Petitioner Jorge Luis Medina Gonzalez a copy of the petition (ECF No. 1)
14 along with a copy of this order; and
15 b. Send Ms. Maria Gonzalez a copy of this order at the address listed on page 14 of
16 the petition (ECF No. 1 at 14).
17 3. Failure to comply with this order may result in a recommendation of dismissal for failure
18 to comply with a Court order.
19
20 IT IS SO ORDERED. DAA Le
21 | Dated: _ April 14, 2026 _ eee
STANLEY A. BOONE
22 United States Magistrate Judge
23
24
25
26
27 | Ss
2 Ms. Gonzalez may contact the Office of the Federal Public Defender for the Eastern District of California for
28 | assistance.