Hibbert v. Chappell

Filing 4

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE. The Clerk shall serve by certified mail a copy of this order and the petition, and all attachments thereto, on Respondent and Respondent's attorney, the Attorney General of the State of California. The Clerk also shall serve a copy of this order on Petitioner. Habeas Answer due by 4/30/2013. Signed by Judge Edward J. Davila on 3/1/2013. (ecg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/1/2013)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10
BYRON HIBBERT,

12

Petitioner,

13

vs.

14
KEVIN CHAPPELL, Warden,
15
Respondent.
16

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. C 13-00300 EJD (PR)
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

17
18

Petitioner, a California prisoner, has filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus

19

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, challenging the forfeiture of good time credits while

20

incarcerated at San Quentin State Prison. Petitioner has paid the filing fee.

21
22
23

DISCUSSION
A.

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

24

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

25

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

26

U.S.C. § 2254(a).

27
28

It shall “award the writ or issue an order directing the respondent to show cause
why the writ should not be granted, unless it appears from the application that the
Order to Show Cause
00300Hibbert_osc(rvr).wpd

1

applicant or person detained is not entitled thereto.” Id. § 2243.

2

B.

3

Legal Claims
Petitioner challenges the loss of credits related to the disciplinary finding where

4

he was found to be in possession of a cell phone. Petitioner contends that he was

5

charged with a serious rule violation when he only should have been charged with an

6

administrative violation and that as he had a cellmate, the cell phone could have

7

belonged to the cellmate. Liberally construed, Petitioner’s claim regarding the phone

8

perhaps belonging to the cellmate appears colorable under § 2254 as a sufficiency of the

9

evidence claim.
However, Petitioner’s first claims is DISMISSED as it only involves a question

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

of state law concerning how he should have been charged which fails to state a federal

12

habeas claim. See Estelle v. McGuire, 502 U.S. 62, 67-68 (1991) (federal habeas

13

unavailable for violations of state law or for alleged error in the interpretation or

14

application of state law).

15
16

CONCLUSION

17

For the foregoing reasons,

18

1

The Clerk shall serve by certified mail a copy of this order and the

19

petition, and all attachments thereto, on Respondent and Respondent’s attorney, the

20

Attorney General of the State of California. The Clerk also shall serve a copy of this

21

order on Petitioner.

22

2.

Respondent shall file with the court and serve on petitioner, within sixty

23

(60) days of the issuance of this order, an answer conforming in all respects to Rule 5 of

24

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

25

should not be issued. Respondent shall file with the answer and serve on Petitioner a

26

copy of all portions of the state trial record that have been transcribed previously and

27

that are relevant to a determination of the issues presented by the petition.

28

///
Order to Show Cause
00300Hibbert_osc(rvr).wpd

2

1

If Petitioner wishes to respond to the answer, he shall do so by filing a traverse

2

with the court and serving it on Respondent within thirty (30) days of his receipt of the

3

answer.

4

3.

Respondent may file a motion to dismiss on procedural grounds in lieu of

5

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

6

Governing Section 2254 Cases. If Respondent files such a motion, Petitioner shall file

7

with the Court and serve on Respondent an opposition or statement of non-opposition

8

within thirty (30) days of receipt of the motion, and Respondent shall file with the

9

court and serve on Petitioner a reply within fifteen (15) days of receipt of any

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

opposition.
4.

Petitioner is reminded that all communications with the court must be

12

served on Respondent by mailing a true copy of the document to Respondent’s counsel.

13

Petitioner must keep the court and all parties informed of any change of address by

14

filing a separate paper captioned “Notice of Change of Address.” He must comply with

15

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

16

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

17
18

DATED:

3/1/2013

EDWARD J. DAVILA
United States District Judge

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Order to Show Cause
00300Hibbert_osc(rvr).wpd

3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

BYRON HIBBERT,
Case Number CV 13-00300 EJD (PR)
Petitioner,
vs.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

KEVIN CHAPPELL, Warden,
Respondent.
/
I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S.
District Court, Northern District of California.
3/1/2013
That on ______________________________, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the
attached, by placing said copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the
person(s)hereinafter listed, by depositing said envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said
copy(ies) inter-office delivery receptacle located in the Clerk's office.

Byron Hibbert
H-76489
San Quentin State Prison
San Quentin, CA 94964

3/1/2013
DATED: ________________________

Richard W. Wieking, Clerk
/s/ By: Elizabeth Garcia, Deputy Clerk