Lena v. The United States District Court for the Northern District of California et al

Filing 8

ORDER OF DISMISSAL; GRANTING LEAVE TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS. Signed by Judge Jeffrey S. White on 4/26/12. (jjoS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/26/2012)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9

12
13

No. C 12-1354 JSW (PR)

MICHAEL ANGELO LENA,

ORDER OF DISMISSAL;
GRANTING LEAVE TO
PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS

Petitioner,

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

v.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT
COURT, et al.,

(Docket No. 3)

14

Respondents.
/

15
16

Petitioner, a prisoner of the State of California, has filed a petition for a writ of
17

error coram nobis challenging a conviction in federal court from 1990. The writ of error
18

coram nobis affords a remedy to attack a federal conviction when the petitioner has
19

served his sentence and is no longer in custody. See Telink, Inc. v. United States, 24
20

F.3d 42, 45 (9th Cir. 1994); United States v. Walgren, 885 F.2d 1417, 1420 (9th Cir.
21

1989). Petitioner alleges that he has served the sentence on the federal conviction that he
22

challenges in this petition. He alleges that he is currently being prosecuted on state
23

charges in Marin County Superior Court, and that his federal conviction from 1990 is
24

being used as a prior “strike” conviction under California’s Three Strikes Law to
25

enhance petitioner’s sentence. As Petitioner is challenging a prior federal custody and
26

has served his sentence for it, the writ of coram nobis appears to be the appropriate
27

remedy.
28

Unfortunately for Petitioner, however, the grounds upon which he challenges his
federal conviction is without merit. Petitioner alleges that he was convicted in federal

1

court in 1990 pursuant to a guilty plea, three years prior to passage of California’s Three

2

Strikes Law. He claims that the conviction is unconstitutional because he did not know

3

that his guilty plea and conviction in federal court could later be used as a “strike” to

4

enhance his sentence if he faced charges in California state court in the future. Although

5

due process requires that a defendant be informed of the direct consequences of the plea,

6

the court need not advise him of "all possible collateral consequences." Torrey v.

7

Estelle, 842 F.2d 234, 235 (9th Cir. 1988). Collateral consequences include the

8

possibility of a future sentence enhancement based on the guilty plea. United States v.

9

Garrett, 680 F.2d 64, 65-66 (9th Cir. 1982). There is no violation of due process where
a trial court fails to inform a defendant of collateral consequences nor where counsel

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

fails to do so. Torrey, 842 F.2d at 236-37. Consequently, the fact that Petitioner was not

12

informed of and did not know that a future sentence enhancement could be based upon

13

his guilty plea in his 1990 federal conviction does not render that conviction

14

unconstitutional. Accordingly, the petition for a writ of coram nobis is DISMISSED.

15

In addition, Petitioner seeks an order from this Court enjoining the state court from

16

using his prior state court conviction as a strike. Under principles of comity and

17

federalism, a federal court should not interfere with ongoing state criminal proceedings

18

by granting injunctive relief. See Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37, 43-54 (1971).

19

Accordingly, the injunction petitioner requests is DENIED.

20
21

In light of Petitioner’s lack of funds, his application for leave to proceed in forma
pauperis is GRANTED (docket number 3).

22

The Clerk shall enter judgment and close the file.

23

IT IS SO ORDERED.

24
25

DATED: April 26, 2012
JEFFREY S. WHITE
United States District Judge

26
27
28
2

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

FOR THE

3

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

4
5
MICHAEL ANGELO LENA,

Case Number: CV12-01354 JSW

6
Plaintiff,

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

7
v.
8
US DISTRICT COURT et al,
9
Defendant.

/

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S.
12 District Court, Northern District of California.
13 That on April 26, 2012, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the attached, by placing
said copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter listed, by
14 depositing said envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into an inter-office
delivery receptacle located in the Clerk's office.
15
16
17 Michael Angelo Lena 199107
Marin County Jail
18 13 Peter Behr Drive
San Rafael, CA 94903
19
Dated: April 26, 2012
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Richard W. Wieking, Clerk
By: Jennifer Ottolini, Deputy Clerk