Martinez v. Sullivan
Filing
7
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE. Habeas Answer or Dispositive Motion due by 10/20/2017. Signed by Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley on 8/21/2017. (ahm, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/21/2017)
1
2
3
4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
5
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
6
7
RICKY MARTINEZ,
Case No. 17-cv-04436-JSC
Plaintiff,
8
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
v.
9
10
WILLIAM SULLIVAN,
Re: Dkt. No. 1
Defendant.
United States District Court
Northern District of California
11
12
13
Petitioner, a prisoner of the State of California, filed a habeas corpus petition pursuant to 28
14
U.S.C. § 2254. (Dkt. No. 1-1.) Plaintiff also moves to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) under 28
15
U.S.C. § 1915. (Dkt. No. 1-2, 3.) Due to sufficient funds in petitioner’s trust account, his application
16
to proceed in forma pauperis is DENIED. (Dkt. No. 3 at 5-6.) Petitioner must pay $5 within 28 days
17
of this Order or the case may be dismissed.
18
Plaintiff’s petition sets forth three claims challenging the constitutionality of petitioner’s
19
conviction in state court: violation of the right to a fair trial under the Sixth Amendment, violation of
20
effective assistance of counsel under the Sixth Amendment, and due process violations under the
21
Fourteenth Amendment.
22
These claims, when liberally construed, are cognizable and potentially meritorious. Good
23
cause appearing, Respondent is hereby ordered to show cause why the petition should not be
24
granted.
25
In order to expedite the resolution of this case, it is further ordered as follows:
26
1. The Clerk shall serve respondent and the respondent’s attorney, the Attorney General of
27
28
the State of California, with a copy of this order and the petition with all attachments.
2. Consistent with Habeas Local Rule 2254-6, Respondent shall file with the court and
1
serve on petitioner, within 60 days of service of the petition and this order, an answer conforming
2
in all respects to Rule 5 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, showing cause why a writ of
3
habeas corpus should not be granted based on the claims found cognizable herein. Respondent
4
shall file with the answer and serve on petitioner a copy of all portions of the state trial record that
5
have been transcribed previously and that are relevant to a determination of the issues presented
6
by the petition.
7
8
9
If petitioner wishes to respond to the answer, he shall do so by filing a traverse with the
court and serving it on Respondent within 30 days of the date the answer is filed.
3. Respondent may file, within 60 days, a motion to dismiss on procedural grounds in lieu
of an answer, as set forth in the Advisory Committee Notes to Rule 4 of the Rules Governing
11
United States District Court
Northern District of California
10
Section 2254 Cases. If respondent files such a motion, petitioner shall file with the court and
12
serve on respondent an opposition or statement of non-opposition within 30 days of the date the
13
motion is filed, and respondent shall file with the court and serve on petitioner a reply within 14
14
days of the date any opposition is filed.
15
16
4. The Clerk shall send a notice to petitioner and respondent regarding consenting to the
jurisdiction of a magistrate judge.
17
18
19
20
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: August 21, 2017
21
________________________
JACQUELINE SCOTT CORLEY
United States Magistrate Judge
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?