Manai v. Cates

Filing 19

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE. Signed by Judge Charles R. Breyer on 2/21/2014. (crblc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/21/2014)

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
12
13
14
15

No. C 12-04399 CRB

SLIM MANAI,

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Plaintiff,
v.
MATHEW CATES,
Defendant.

/

16
17

Petitioner Slim Manai, a state prisoner incarcerated at the California Men’s Colony

18

State Prison in San Luis Obispo, California, has filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus

19

under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. See generally Petition (dkt. 17). Petitioner was convicted of first

20

degree burglary of a home with intent to commit a felony, oral copulation against the

21

victims’ will(s), sexual battery using physical restraint, assault with a deadly weapon,

22

criminal threat, and assault with a deadly weapon. Id. at 3, 16. Petitioner argues that there

23

are four grounds for relief: (1) that the trial court erred in precluding the defense from

24

inquiring into evidence that the complaining witnesses were involved in a romantic

25

relationship; (2) that the trial court’s refusal to replace a biased juror denied Petitioner his

26

right to an impartial jury; (3) that the trial court’s admission of evidence of Petitioner’s

27

foreign crime violated his right to a fair trial; and (4) that the cumulative effect of the trial

28

court’s errors denied him his right to a fair trial. Id. at 19-58.

1

A court may entertain a petition for a writ of habeas corpus “in behalf of a person in

2

custody pursuant to the judgment of a State court only on the ground that he is in custody in

3

violation of the Constitution or laws or treaties of the United States.” 28 U.S.C. § 2254(a). It

4

shall “award the writ or issue an order directing the respondent to show cause why the writ

5

should not be granted, unless it appears from the application that the applicant or person

6

detained is not entitled thereto.” Id. § 2243.

7
8
9

The Court has reviewed the petition and finds good cause to proceed. Accordingly,
1.

The Clerk of the Court shall serve by certified mail a copy of this Order

and the petition and all attachments thereto upon the Respondents and the Respondents’

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

counsel, the Attorney General of the State of California. The Clerk shall also serve a copy of

11

this Order on the Petitioner’s counsel.

12

2.

Respondents shall file with this Court and serve upon the Petitioner,

13

within sixty (60) days of the issuance of this Order, an answer conforming in all respects to

14

Rule 5 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, showing cause why a writ of habeas

15

corpus should not be issued. Respondents shall file with the answer a copy of all portions of

16

the state trial and appellate record that have been transcribed previously and that are relevant

17

to a determination of the issues presented by the petition.

18

3.

If the Petitioner wishes to respond to the answer, he shall do so by filing

19

a traverse with the Court and serving it upon the Respondents within thirty (30) days of his

20

receipt of the answer.

21

IT IS SO ORDERED.

22
23

Dated: February 21, 2014
CHARLES R. BREYER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

24
25
26
27
28

G:\CRBALL\2012\4399\osc 2-14.wpd

2