Scoma v. Adams

Filing 7

ORDER to Show Cause. Signed by Judge Jeffrey S. White on March 12, 2010. (jswlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/12/2010)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA PHILIP JOSEPH SCOMA, Plaintiff, v. ANTHONY HEDGPETH, Warden of Salinas Valley State Prison, Defendant. / ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE No. C 09-03295 JSW

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

Petitioner, Philip Joseph Scoma, a state prisoner, has filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. BACKGROUND Petitioner was acquitted of attempted murder, but found guilty of the lesser included offense of attempted voluntary manslaughter for the shooting of his son, Nicholas Scoma. Petitioner was sentenced to a term of ten years in prison. Petitioner is currently incarcerated at Salinas Valley State Prison in Soledad, California. LEGAL CLAIMS Petitioner seeks habeas relief and challenges the judgment and conviction on the grounds that they are invalid in violation of the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. Petitioner contends that the trial court improperly instructed as to the required intent to convict Petitioner of attempted voluntary manslaughter. Petitioner also contends that he was deprived his right to effective assistance of counsel at trial and on appeal.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Liberally construed, the claims appear potentially colorable under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 and merit an answer from Respondent. 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 attachments thereto upon Respondent and Respondent's attorney, the Attorney General of the State of California. 2. Respondent 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 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.

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

Dated: March 12, 2010

JEFFREY S. WHITE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2