Arana v. Davis

Filing 6

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE - The Clerk shall serve a copy of this order, the petition and all attachments thereto, on respondent and respondent's counsel, the Attorney General for the State of California. The Clerk shall also serve a copy of this order on petitioner. Habeas Answer or Dispositive Motion due by 2/21/2017. Signed by Judge William H. Orrick on 1/3/2017. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service) (jmdS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/3/2017)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

OSCAR ARANA,

United States District Court
Northern District of California

Plaintiff,

Case No. 16-cv-05655-WHO

12

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

v.
13
14

RON DAVIS,
Defendant.

15

Dkt. No. 5

16

INTRODUCTION

17
18

Petitioner Oscar Arana seeks federal habeas relief from his state convictions. The

19

petition for such relief has been reviewed under 28 U.S.C. § 2243 and Rule 4 of the Rules

20

Governing Section 2254 Cases and has been found to state cognizable claims.

21

Accordingly, respondent shall file an answer or dispositive motion in response to the

22

habeas petition on or before February 21, 2017, unless an extension is granted.
BACKGROUND

23
24

According to the petition, in 2013, a San Francisco County Superior Court jury

25

convicted Arana of assault with a deadly weapon and aggravated mayhem. The jury found

26

true two sentencing enhancement allegations. He received a sentence of eight years to life

27

in state prison.

28

DISCUSSION

1
2

This Court may entertain a petition for writ of habeas corpus “in behalf of a person
in custody pursuant to the judgment of a State court only on the ground that he is in

4

custody in violation of the Constitution or laws or treaties of the United States.” 28 U.S.C.

5

§ 2254(a). A district court considering an application for a writ of habeas corpus shall

6

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

7

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

8

detained is not entitled thereto.” 28 U.S.C. § 2243. Summary dismissal is appropriate

9

only where the allegations in the petition are vague or conclusory, palpably incredible, or

10

patently frivolous or false. See Hendricks v. Vasquez, 908 F.2d 490, 491 (9th Cir. 1990).

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

3

As grounds for federal habeas relief, Arana claims that (1) his mayhem conviction

12

was not supported by sufficient evidence; (2) the trial court violated his right to due

13

process by failing to instruct the jury on a lesser included offense; (3) the mayhem statute

14

is unconstitutionally vague; and (4) defense counsel rendered ineffective assistance. When

15

liberally construed, these claims are cognizable on federal habeas review.

16

CONCLUSION

17

1. The Clerk shall serve a copy of this order, the petition and all attachments

18

thereto, on respondent and respondent’s counsel, the Attorney General for the State of

19

California. The Clerk shall also serve a copy of this order on petitioner.

20

2. Respondent shall file with the Court and serve on petitioner, within sixty (60)

21

days of the date this order is filed, an answer conforming in all respects to Rule 5 of the

22

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

23

not be granted based on petitioner’s cognizable claims. Respondent shall file with the

24

answer and serve on petitioner a copy of all portions of the state trial record that previously

25

have been transcribed and that are relevant to a determination of the issues presented by

26

the petition.

27
28

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’s counsel within thirty (30) days of the date the
2

1
2

answer is filed.
4. In lieu of an answer, respondent may file, within sixty (60) days of the date this

3

order is filed, a motion to dismiss on procedural grounds, as set forth in the Advisory

4

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

5

files such a motion, petitioner shall file with the Court and serve on respondent an

6

opposition or statement of non-opposition within thirty (30) days of the date the motion is

7

filed, and respondent shall file with the Court and serve on petitioner a reply within fifteen

8

(15) days of the date any opposition is filed.

9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

5. Petitioner is reminded that all communications with the Court must be served on
respondent by mailing a true copy of the document to respondent’s counsel.
6. It is petitioner’s responsibility to prosecute this case. Petitioner must keep the

12

Court and respondent informed of any change of address and must comply with the

13

Court’s orders in a timely fashion. Failure to do so may result in the dismissal of this

14

action for failure to prosecute pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).

15
16
17
18

7. Upon a showing of good cause, requests for a reasonable extension of time will
be granted provided they are filed on or before the deadline they seek to extend.
8. The Court notes that the filing fee has been paid. Accordingly, Arana’s motion
to proceed in forma pauperis (Dkt. No. 5) is DENIED as moot.

19

9. The Clerk shall terminate Dkt. No. 5.

20

IT IS SO ORDERED.

21

Dated: January 3, 2017

_________________________
WILLIAM H. ORRICK
United States District Judge

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3