Lynch v. Hartley

Filing 7

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE. Signed by Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton on 4/20/11. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service)(nah, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/20/2011)

1
2
3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

5

OAKLAND DIVISION

6
7

THERON N. LYNCH,
Petitioner,

8
vs.

9

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

JAMES A. HARTLEY, Warden,
Respondent.

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

No. C 10-2819 PJH (PR)

/
12
13

Petitioner, a California prisoner currently incarcerated at Avenal State Prison, has

14

filed a pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. He has

15

paid the filing fee.

16
17

Petitioner was convicted in Alameda County, which is in this district, so venue is
proper here. See 28 U.S.C. § 2241(d).

18

BACKGROUND

19

In his petition, petitioner says that he pleaded guilty to oral copulation, assault with a

20

deadly weapon, and use of a firearm. He was sentenced to prison for fourteen years.

21

Petitioner says that he was denied leave to file a direct appeal by the California

22

Court of Appeal. He contends, however, that he was exhausted these claims by way of

23

state habeas petitions.
DISCUSSION

24
25
26

A.

Standard of Review
This court may entertain a petition for writ of habeas corpus "in behalf of a person in

27

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

28

in violation of the Constitution or laws or treaties of the United States." 28 U.S.C. §

1

2254(a); Rose v. Hodges, 423 U.S. 19, 21 (1975). Habeas corpus petitions must meet

2

heightened pleading requirements. McFarland v. Scott, 512 U.S. 849, 856 (1994). An

3

application for a federal writ of habeas corpus filed by a prisoner who is in state custody

4

pursuant to a judgment of a state court must “specify all the grounds for relief which are

5

available to the petitioner ... and shall set forth in summary form the facts supporting each

6

of the grounds thus specified.” Rule 2(c) of the Rules Governing § 2254 Cases, 28 U.S.C.

7

foll. § 2254. “‘[N]otice’ pleading is not sufficient, for the petition is expected to state facts

8

that point to a ‘real possibility of constitutional error.’” Rule 4 Advisory Committee Notes

9

(quoting Aubut v. Maine, 431 F.2d 688, 689 (1st Cir. 1970). “Habeas petitions which
appear on their face to be legally insufficient are subject to summary dismissal.” Calderon

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

v. United States Dist. Court (Nicolaus), 98 F.3d 1102, 1108 (9th Cir. 1996) (Schroeder, J.,

12

concurring).

13

B.

14

Legal Claims
As grounds for federal habeas relief, petitioner asserts that: (1) the sentence he is

15

serving is inconsistent with the sentence as orally pronounced by the sentencing court; (2)

16

he is actually innocent; and (3) his counsel was ineffective in advising him to pled guilty.

17

These contentions are sufficient to require a response.

18

CONCLUSION

19

For the foregoing reasons and for good cause shown,

20

1. The clerk shall serve by regular mail a copy of this order and the petition and all

21

attachments thereto on respondent and respondent's attorney, the Attorney General of the

22

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

23

2. Respondent shall file with the court and serve on petitioner, within sixty days of

24

the issuance of this order, an answer conforming in all respects to Rule 5 of the Rules

25

Governing Section 2254 Cases, showing cause why a writ of habeas corpus should not be

26

granted. Respondent shall file with the answer and serve on petitioner a copy of all

27

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

28

to a determination of the issues presented by the petition.
2

1
2
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 within thirty days of his receipt of the answer.
3. Respondent may file a motion to dismiss on procedural grounds in lieu of an

4

answer, as set forth in the Advisory Committee Notes to Rule 4 of the Rules Governing

5

Section 2254 Cases. If respondent files such a motion, petitioner shall file with the court

6

and serve on respondent an opposition or statement of non-opposition within thirty days of

7

receipt of the motion, and respondent shall file with the court and serve on petitioner a reply

8

within fifteen days of receipt of any opposition.

9

4. 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. Petitioner

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

must keep the court informed of any change of address and must comply with the court's

12

orders in a timely fashion. Failure to do so may result in the dismissal of this action for

13

failure to prosecute pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). See Martinez v.

14

Johnson, 104 F.3d 769, 772 (5th Cir. 1997) (Rule 41(b) applicable in habeas cases).

15
16

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: April 20, 2011.
PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON
United States District Judge

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

P:\PRO-SE\PJH\HC.10\LYNCH2819.OSC.wpd

3