Redwine v. Grounds

Filing 5

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE. Signed by Judge Thelton E. Henderson on 01/31/2012. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(tmi, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/1/2012)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11

No. C-11-4233 TEH (PR)

RAYMOND ALLEN REDWINE,

12

Petitioner,
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

13
14

v.
R. GROUNDS, Warden,

15

Respondent.

16

/

17
18

Petitioner, a state prisoner incarcerated at Correctional

19

Training Facility-North in Soledad, California, has filed a pro se

20

Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254

21

challenging a judgment of conviction from Butte County Superior

22

Court.

23

pauperis.

Doc. #1.

Petitioner also seeks leave to proceed in forma

Doc. ## 2 and 4.

24
25

I

26

According to the Petition, in April 2008, Petitioner was

27

sentenced to nineteen years in state prison following his conviction

28

of second degree robbery.

Doc. #1 at 1.

Petitioner sought post-

1

conviction relief in the state superior and appellate courts until

2

the California Supreme Court denied his final petition on July 13,

3

2011.

4

Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus followed.

Doc. #1 at 3-5, 7, 21, 25, 27-30.

The instant federal

5
6
7

II
This Court may entertain a petition for a writ of habeas

8

corpus “in behalf of a person in custody pursuant to the judgment of

9

a State court only on the ground that he is in custody in violation

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

of the Constitution or laws or treaties of the United States.”

11

U.S.C. § 2254(a).

12

directing the respondent to show cause why the writ should not be

13

granted, unless it appears from the application that the applicant

14

or person detained is not entitled thereto.”

15

28

It shall “award the writ or issue an order

Id. § 2243.

Petitioner seeks federal habeas corpus relief by alleging

16

that trial counsel was ineffective when he failed to inform

17

Petitioner about the “two-dismissal rule”, resulting in Petitioner

18

rejecting the initial plea bargain of eight years and four months.

19

Doc. #1 at 3, 5.

20

Liberally construed, Petitioner’s claims appear cognizable

21

under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 and merit an Answer from Respondent.

22

Zichko v. Idaho, 247 F.3d 1015, 1020 (9th Cir. 2001) (federal courts

23

must construe pro se petitions for writs of habeas corpus

24

liberally).

25

See

26
27
28

III
For the foregoing reasons and for good cause shown,
2

1
2
3

1.

Petitioner’s requests to proceed in forma pauperis

(Doc. ## 2 & 4) are GRANTED.
2.

The Clerk shall serve by certified mail a copy of

4

this Order and the Petition, and all attachments thereto (i.e., Doc.

5

#1), on Respondent and Respondent’s attorney, the Attorney General

6

of the State of California.

7

this Order on Petitioner.

8
9

3.

The Clerk also shall serve a copy of

Respondent shall file with the Court and serve on

Petitioner, within sixty (60) days of the issuance of this Order, an

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

Answer conforming in all respects to Rule 5 of the Rules Governing

11

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

12

not be granted.

13

Petitioner a copy of all portions of the state trial record that

14

have been transcribed previously and that are relevant to a

15

determination of the issues presented by the Petition.

16

Respondent shall file with the Answer and serve on

If Petitioner wishes to respond to the Answer, he shall do

17

so by filing a Traverse with the Court and serving it on Respondent

18

within thirty (30) days of his receipt of the Answer.

19

4.

In lieu of an Answer, Respondent may file a Motion to

20

Dismiss on procedural grounds, as set forth in the Advisory

21

Committee Notes to Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases.

22

If Respondent files such a motion, Petitioner shall file with the

23

Court and serve on Respondent an Opposition or Statement of

24

Non-Opposition within thirty (30) days of receipt of the motion, and

25

Respondent shall file with the Court and serve on Petitioner a Reply

26

within fifteen (15) days of receipt of any Opposition.

27
28

5.

Petitioner is reminded that all communications with
3

1

the Court must be served on Respondent by mailing a true copy of the

2

document to Respondent’s counsel.

3

Court and all parties informed of any change of address.

Petitioner also must keep the

4
5

IT IS SO ORDERED.

6
7

DATED

01/31/2012
THELTON E. HENDERSON
United States District Judge

8
9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12

G:\PRO-SE\TEH\HC.11\Redwine-11-4233-osc.wpd

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

4