Cannon v. Janda

Filing 12

ORDER to show cause re 11 Amended Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus. Answer due by 3/17/14. Traverse due by 4/16/14. Signed by Judge Thelton E. Henderson on 1/16/14. (tehlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/16/2014)

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

3
4

DARIO L. CANNON,

5

Plaintiff,
v.

6
7

Case No. 13-cv-02419-TEH
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

GERALD JANDA,
Defendant.

8
9

The Court is in receipt of Petitioner Dario Cannon’s amended petition for a writ of

10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

habeas corpus. Rule 15 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure applies to Petitioner’s

12

amended petition, and Rule 15(b) instructs Courts to “freely give leave when justice so

13

requires.” See Rule 12 of the Rules Governing §2254 Cases in the United States District

14

Courts, hereinafter “§2254 Rules” (authorizing application of Federal Rules of Civil

15

Procedure where not inconsistent with §2254 Rules). In applying Rule 15, courts are to

16

consider whether the amendment is futile, constitutes undue delay or bad faith, or would

17

cause prejudice to the opposing party. Foman v. Davis, 371 U.S. 178, 182 (1962)

18

(outlining reasons where Court may exercise discretion to deny leave to amend under Rule

19

15). Finding that Petitioner’s amendment is not futile, does not constitute undue delay or

20

bad faith, nor would Respondent be prejudiced as Respondent has yet to file any

21

responsive pleading with respect to the original petition – the Court grants Petitioner leave

22

to file an amended petition.

23

Because it does not appear from the face of the petition that Petitioner is not entitled

24

to habeas relief, the Court hereby orders Respondent Gerald Janda “to show cause why the

25

writ should not be granted.” 28 U.S.C. § 2243. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED

26

that:

27
28

1. The Clerk of the Court shall serve by certified mail a copy of this order on
Respondent’s attorney, the Attorney General of the State of California.

1

2. On or before March 17, 2014, Respondent shall file and serve an answer

2

showing cause why this Court should not issue a writ of habeas corpus. Respondent’s

3

answer shall conform in all respects to Rule 5 of the § 2254 Rules. In addition,

4

Respondent shall file and serve with his answer a copy of all portions of the administrative

5

record that have been transcribed previously and that are relevant to a determination of the

6

issues presented by the petition.

7
8

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 on or before April 16, 2014.

9
10

IT IS SO ORDERED.

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13

Dated: 1/16/14

_________________________________
THELTON E. HENDERSON
United States District Judge

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

2