Robertson v. Runnals et al

Filing 7

ORDER to show cause and granting ifp applic. Signed by Judge Hamilton on 8/15/05. (pjhlc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/15/2005)

Robertson v. Runnals et al

Doc. 7

Case 3:05-cv-03103-PJH

Document 7

Filed 08/15/2005

Page 1 of 2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 v. D.L RUNNELS, Warden, QUINCY ROBERTSON, Petitioner,

NOT FOR CITATION UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

No. C 05-3103 PJH ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE AND GRANTING IFP APPLICATION

Respondent. _______________________________/ Petitioner Quincy Robertson ("Robertson"), a state prisoner, has filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. BACKGROUND On February 7, 2001, Robertson was convicted of second degree murder and assault with infliction of great bodily injury, and was found to have personally used a firearm in commission of the offenses, by a jury in the Alameda County Superior Court in the State of California. He was sentenced to forty years to life in prison. Robertson unsuccessfully appealed his conviction to the California Court of Appeal, which affirmed the judgment on June 30, 2003. The California Supreme Court subsequently denied Robertson's petition for review on August 19, 2004. He filed the instant federal habeas petition on August 1, 2005. DISCUSSION A. Legal Standard

United United States District Court

11
For the Northern District of California

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

This court may entertain a petition for writ of habeas corpus "in behalf of a person in custody pursuant to the judgment of a State court only on the ground that he is in custody in violation of the Constitution or laws or treaties of the United States." 28 U.S.C. § 2254(a). It shall "award the writ or issue an order directing the respondent to show cause why the writ should not be granted, unless it appears from the application that the applicant or person detained is not entitled thereto." 28 U.S.C. § 2243. B. Petitioner's Legal Claims

Dockets.Justia.com

Case 3:05-cv-03103-PJH

Document 7

Filed 08/15/2005

Page 2 of 2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Petitioner seeks federal habeas corpus relief, raising two claims: (1) that he was deprived of his Sixth Amendment right to jury trial and his due process rights when the trial court allowed the jury to return a guilty verdict based on the second degree felony murder theory; and (2) that his Fifth Amendment rights were violated when the trial court denied his motion to suppress his confession. Liberally construed, the claims appear colorable under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 and merit an answer from respondents. C. IFP Application

Good cause appearing, Robertson's application for in forma pauperis status is GRANTED. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons and for good cause shown 1. The clerk shall serve by certified mail a copy of this order and the petition and all

United States District Court

11
For the Northern District of California

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

attachments thereto upon respondents. The clerk shall also serve a copy of this order on petitioner. 2. Respondents shall file with the court and serve on petitioner, within 60 days of

the date of this order, an answer conforming in all respects to Rule 5 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, showing cause why a writ of habeas corpus should not be issued. Respondent shall file with the answer and serve on petitioner a copy of all portions of the administrative record that are relevant to a determination of the issues presented by the petition. 3. If the petitioner wishes to respond to the answer, he shall do so by filing a

traverse with the court and serving it on respondent within 30 days of his receipt of the answer.

IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: August 15, 2005 ______________________________ PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON United States District Judge

2