Vale v. Gibson

Filing 7

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE Habeas Answer or Dispositive Motion due by 7/7/2014. Signed by Magistrate Judge Nandor J. Vadas on 5/6/2014. (njvlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/6/2014)

1
2
3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

5

EUREKA DIVISION

6
7

JESSE J. VALE,
Petitioner,

8
vs.

9

ORDER FOR RESPONDENT
TO SHOW CAUSE

CONNIE GIBSON,
Respondent.

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

No. C 14-1588 NJV (PR)

/
12
13

Petitioner, a California prisoner, filed a pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus

14

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner was convicted in Santa Clara County, which is in

15

this district, so venue is proper here. See 28 U.S.C. § 2241(d). Petitioner has paid the

16

filing fee and consented to the jurisdiction of a Magistrate Judge. Docket No. 3.

17

BACKGROUND

18

A jury convicted petitioner of carjacking and second degree robbery. Petitioner

19

admitted he had three prior serious felony convictions and was sentenced to 42 years to life

20

for the carjacking with a concurrent term of 40 years to life for the robbery. Petitioner states

21

that he appealed to the court of appeals and state supreme court, but those appeals were

22

denied.
DISCUSSION

23
24
25

A.

Standard of Review
This court may entertain a petition for writ of habeas corpus "in behalf of a person in

26

custody pursuant to the judgment of a State court only on the ground that he is in custody

27

in violation of the Constitution or laws or treaties of the United States." 28 U.S.C.

28

§ 2254(a); Rose v. Hodges, 423 U.S. 19, 21 (1975). Habeas corpus petitions must meet

1

heightened pleading requirements. McFarland v. Scott, 512 U.S. 849, 856 (1994). An

2

application for a federal writ of habeas corpus filed by a prisoner who is in state custody

3

pursuant to a judgment of a state court must “specify all the grounds for relief available to

4

the petitioner ... [and] state the facts supporting each ground.” Rule 2(c) of the Rules

5

Governing § 2254 Cases, 28 U.S.C. foll. § 2254. “‘[N]otice’ pleading is not sufficient, for the

6

petition is expected to state facts that point to a ‘real possibility of constitutional error.’”

7

Rule 4 Advisory Committee Notes (quoting Aubut v. Maine, 431 F.2d 688, 689 (1st Cir.

8

1970)).

9

B.

Petitioner’s sole ground for federal habeas relief is that the trial court erroneously

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

Legal Claims

denied his motion which stated that the prosecutor improperly used peremptory challenges

12

in violation of Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986). This claim is sufficient to require a

13

response.

14

CONCLUSION

15

1. The clerk shall serve by regular mail a copy of this order, the petition and all

16

attachments thereto and a Magistrate Judge jurisdiction consent form on respondent and

17

respondent's attorney, the Attorney General of the State of California. The clerk also shall

18

serve a copy of this order on petitioner.

19

2. Respondent shall file with the court and serve on petitioner, within fifty-six (56)

20

days of the issuance of this order, an answer conforming in all respects to Rule 5 of the

21

Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, showing cause why a writ of habeas corpus should

22

not be granted. Respondent shall file with the answer and serve on petitioner a copy of all

23

portions of the state trial record that have been transcribed previously and that are relevant

24

to a determination of the issues presented by the petition.

25

If petitioner wishes to respond to the answer, he shall do so by filing a traverse with

26

the court and serving it on respondent within twenty-eight (28) days of his receipt of the

27

answer.

28

3. Respondent may file a motion to dismiss on procedural grounds in lieu of an
2

1

answer, as set forth in the Advisory Committee Notes to Rule 4 of the Rules Governing

2

Section 2254 Cases. If respondent files such a motion, it is due fifty-six (56) days from the

3

date this order is entered. If a motion is filed, petitioner shall file with the court and serve

4

on respondent an opposition or statement of non-opposition within twenty-eight (28) days of

5

receipt of the motion, and respondent shall file with the court and serve on petitioner a reply

6

within fourteen (14) days of receipt of any opposition.

7

4. Petitioner is reminded that all communications with the court must be served on

8

respondent by mailing a true copy of the document to respondent’s counsel. Petitioner

9

must keep the court informed of any change of address and must comply with the court's
orders in a timely fashion. Failure to do so may result in the dismissal of this action for

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

failure to prosecute pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). See Martinez v.

12

Johnson, 104 F.3d 769, 772 (5th Cir. 1997) (Rule 41(b) applicable in habeas cases).

13
14

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: May 6, 2014.
NANDOR J. VADAS
United States Magistrate Judge

15
16

G:\PRO-SE\NJV\HC.14\Vale1588.osc.wpd

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

3