Hill v. State of California

Filing 8

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE. Signed by Judge Thelton E. Henderson on 12/02/09. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service)(rbe, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/3/2009)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 I Petitioner was sentenced to twenty-six years to life in state prison following his convictions for first degree murder, assault on a child causing death and felony child abuse involving the infliction of great bodily injury on a child under the age of Petitioner, a state prisoner incarcerated at the Sierra Conservation Center in Jamestown, California, has filed a pro se Amended Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging a judgment of conviction from Alameda County Superior Court. v. MATTHEW CATE, Secretary, Respondent. / CHAZARUS HILL, Sr., Petitioner, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE No. C-09-3147 TEH (PR) IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

five.

Doc. #7 at 2.

The California Court of Appeal affirmed the

judgment in an unpublished opinion, People v. Hill, No. A117040, 2008 WL 2130476 (Cal. Ct. App. May 21, 2008), and the California Supreme Court denied his petition for review. Id.

Petitioner filed a federal Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus, Doc. #1, which the Court dismissed with leave to amend within thirty days. Doc. #6. On October 16, 2009, Petitioner filed Doc. #7.

the instant Amended Petition.

II This Court may entertain a petition for a 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." U.S.C. § 2254(a). It shall "award the writ or issue an order 28

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." Id. § 2243.

Petitioner seeks federal habeas corpus relief by alleging various claims, including there was insufficient evidence to support his convictions, the trial court improperly removed a juror during trial, and the state improperly calculated his time credits. #7. Liberally construed, these claims appear cognizable under See Zichko v. Idaho, Doc.

§ 2254 and merit an Answer from Respondent.

247 F.3d 1015, 1020 (9th Cir. 2001) (federal courts must construe pro se petitions for writs of habeas corpus liberally). // 2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

III For the foregoing reasons and for good cause shown, 1. The Clerk shall serve by certified mail a copy of

this Order and the Amended Petition, and all attachments thereto, on Respondent and Respondent's attorney, the Attorney General of the State of California. Order on Petitioner. 2. Respondent shall file with the Court and serve on The Clerk also shall serve a copy of this

Petitioner, within sixty (60) days of the issuance 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 granted. Respondent shall file with the Answer and serve on

Petitioner a copy of all portions of the state trial record that have been transcribed previously and that are relevant to a determination of the issues presented in the Amended Petition. If Petitioner wishes to respond to the Answer, he shall do so by filing a Traverse with the Court and serving it on Respondent within thirty (30) days of his receipt of the Answer. 3. In lieu of an Answer, Respondent may file a Motion to

Dismiss on procedural grounds, as set forth in the Advisory Committee Notes to Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases. If Respondent files such a motion, Petitioner shall file with the Court and serve on Respondent an Opposition or Statement of Non-Opposition within thirty (30) days of receipt of the motion, and Respondent shall file with the Court and serve on Petitioner a Reply within fifteen (15) days of receipt of any Opposition. 4. Petitioner is reminded that all communications with 3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

the Court must be served on Respondent by mailing a true copy of the document to Respondent's counsel. Petitioner also must keep the

Court and all parties informed of any change of address.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED

12/02/09 THELTON E. HENDERSON United States District Judge

G:\PRO-SE\TEH\HC.09\Hill-09-3147-osc.wpd

4