Jose Garcia Mejia v. Ralph M Diaz

Filing 9

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE; GRANTING MOTION FOR LEAVE TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS. The Clerk shall serve by certified mail a copy of this order and thepetition and all attachments thereto on Respondent and Respondent's attorney, the Attorney Genera l of the State of California. The Clerk also shall serve a copy of this order on Petitioner. Motions terminated: 8 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis filed by Jose Garcia Mejia. Habeas Answer or Dispositive Motion due by 6/9/2014. Signed by Judge Edward J. Davila on 4/9/2014. (ecg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/10/2014)

Download PDF
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 JOSE GARCIA MEJIA, 12 Petitioner, 13 v. 14 15 16 RALPH M. DIAZ, Warden, Respondent. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. C 13-04692 EJD (PR) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE; GRANTING MOTION FOR LEAVE TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS (Docket No. 8) 17 18 Petitioner, a state prisoner, has filed a pro se petition for a writ of habeas 19 corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, challenging his state conviction. Petitioner has filed 20 a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. (Docket No. 8.) 21 BACKGROUND 22 23 According to the petition, Petitioner pleaded guilty in Santa Clara County of 24 multiple counts of sexual intercourse or sodomy with a child 10 years old or 25 younger, along with other charges. (Pet. at 2.) Petitioner was sentenced to 75 years 26 to life in 2008. (Id.) 27 28 Petitioner appealed his conviction, and the state appellate court affirmed. (Id. at 2.) The state high court denied review. (Id. at 3.) Order To Show Cause; Granting IFP P:\PRO-SE\EJD\HC.13\04692Mejia_osc&ifp.wpd Petitioner filed the instant federal habeas petition on September 17, 2013. 1 2 DISCUSSION 3 4 A. Standard of Review This court may entertain a petition for a writ of habeas corpus “in behalf of a 5 6 person in custody pursuant to the judgment of a State court only on the ground that 7 he is in custody in violation of the Constitution or laws or treaties of the United 8 States.” 28 U.S.C. § 2254(a). It shall “award the writ or issue an order directing the respondent to show 9 cause why the writ should not be granted, unless it appears from the application that 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 the applicant or person detained is not entitled thereto.” Id. § 2243. 12 B. 13 Legal Claims Petitioner claims the following as grounds for habeas relief: (1) he was 14 denied his rights to due process and equal protection of the law when the trial court 15 failed to advise him properly and obtain proper waivers; and (2) the evidence does 16 not support the conviction. Liberally construed, Petitioner’s claims are cognizable 17 under § 2254 and merit an answer from Respondent. 18 CONCLUSION 19 20 For the foregoing reasons and for good cause shown, 21 1. 22 23 Petitioner’s motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, (Docket No. 8), is GRANTED. 2. The Clerk shall serve by certified mail a copy of this order and the 24 petition and all attachments thereto on Respondent and Respondent’s attorney, the 25 Attorney General of the State of California. The Clerk also shall serve a copy of this 26 order on Petitioner. 27 28 3. Respondent shall file with the court and serve on Petitioner, within sixty (60) days of the issuance of this order, an answer conforming in all respects to Order To Show Cause; Granting IFP P:\PRO-SE\EJD\HC.13\04692Mejia_osc&ifp.wpd 2 1 Rule 5 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, showing cause why a writ of 2 habeas corpus should not be issued. Respondent shall file with the answer and serve 3 on Petitioner a copy of all portions of the state trial record that have been transcribed 4 previously and that are relevant to a determination of the issues presented by the 5 petition. 6 If Petitioner wishes to respond to the answer, he shall do so by filing a 7 traverse with the Court and serving it on Respondent within thirty (30) days of his 8 receipt of the answer. 9 4. Respondent may file 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 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 Governing Section 2254 Cases. If Respondent files such a motion, Petitioner shall 12 file with the Court and serve on Respondent an opposition or statement of non- 13 opposition within thirty (30) days of receipt of the motion, and Respondent shall 14 file with the court and serve on Petitioner a reply within fifteen (15) days of receipt 15 of any opposition. 16 5. Petitioner is reminded that all communications with the court must be 17 served on Respondent by mailing a true copy of the document to Respondent’s 18 counsel. Petitioner must also keep the Court and all parties informed of any change 19 of address. 20 This order terminates Docket No. 8. 21 22 DATED: 4/9/2014 EDWARD J. DAVILA United States District Judge 23 24 25 26 27 28 Order To Show Cause; Granting IFP P:\PRO-SE\EJD\HC.13\04692Mejia_osc&ifp.wpd 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA JOSE GARCIA MEJIA, Case Number: CV13-04692 EJD Petitioner, CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE v. RALPH M. DIAZ, 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. 4/10/2014 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) into an inter-office delivery receptacle located in the Clerk's office. Jose Garcia Mejia AF-0665 PO Box 5242 Corcoran, CA 93212 Dated: 4/10/2014 Richard W. Wieking, Clerk /s/ By: Elizabeth Garcia, Deputy Clerk

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?