Brown v. Tampkins
Filing
6
ORDER GRANTING LEAVE TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS AND FOR PETITIONER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY PETITION SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED. Habeas Answer due by 3/29/2013. Show Cause Deadline 2/21/13. Signed by Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton on 1/28/13. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(nah, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/28/2013)
1
2
3
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
4
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
5
OAKLAND DIVISION
6
7
LAWRENCE S. BROWN,
Petitioner,
8
9
vs.
ORDER GRANTING LEAVE TO
PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS
AND FOR PETITIONER TO SHOW
CAUSE WHY PETITION SHOULD
NOT BE DISMISSED
CYNTHIA TAMPKINS,
Respondent.
11
For the Northern District of California
United States District Court
10
No. C 13-0016 PJH (PR)
/
12
13
Petitioner, a California prisoner currently incarcerated at the California Rehabilitation
14
Center has filed a pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254.
15
He also applied for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. Petitioner was convicted in
16
Monterey County, which is in this district, so venue is proper here. See 28 U.S.C. §
17
2241(d). Petitioner was sentenced to a term of six years for burglary and other related
18
counts.
19
According to the petition, the state appeal ended with denial of a petition for review
20
on January 17, 2007. Docket No. 2 at 15. Petitioner has also included an opinion from the
21
Monterey County Superior Court that denied a state habeas petition on March 28, 2012.
22
Id. at 20. The Superior Court denied that petition which alleged petitioner’s appellate
23
attorney rendered ineffective assistance of counsel noting that petitioner previously raised
24
the same claim in prior habeas petition that had been denied on December 8, 2008. Id.
25
The petition was therefore denied as untimely and successive. Id. Petitioner requests this
26
court to look beyond the procedural default and untimeliness issues as he states he did not
27
know he could raise these issues. Id. at 2. However, it seems that petitioner did in fact
28
previously raise these issues in the prior habeas petition that was denied by the Superior
1
Court in 2008. Petitioner shall show cause why this federal petition should not be
2
dismissed as untimely and procedurally defaulted.
3
CONCLUSION
4
1. Leave to proceed in forma pauperis (Docket No. 5) is GRANTED.
5
2. Petitioner shall show cause by February 21, 2013, why this petition should not
6
be dismissed as untimely and procedurally defaulted. If he does not, the case will be
7
dismissed.
8
9
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: January 28, 2013.
PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON
United States District Judge
11
For the Northern District of California
United States District Court
10
12
G:\PRO-SE\PJH\HC.13\Brown0016.osc-p.wpd
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
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?