Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-05034/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-05034-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

EDDIE BALLESTEROS,

Petitioner,

 v

G NOLL, Warden,

Respondent. /

No C-09-5034 VRW (PR)

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Petitioner, a state prisoner incarcerated at the

Correctional Training Facility in Soledad, California, has filed a

pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 USC § 2254

challenging the forfeiture of thirty days of time credits and loss

of certain privileges following a disciplinary hearing finding him

guilty of possession of a cell phone charger. Petitioner has paid

the $5.00 filing fee. 

Petitioner unsuccessfully challenged the forfeiture of

time credits and loss of privileges in the state courts until the

Supreme Court of California denied his final state habeas petition

on September 30, 2009. Doc #1 at 31–36. The instant federal

Case 3:09-cv-05034-JW Document 4 Filed 01/27/10 Page 1 of 4
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

petition followed. 

I

A

This court may entertain a petition for a writ of habeas

corpus “in behalf of a person in custody pursuant to the judgment of

a State court only on the ground that he is in custody in violation

of the Constitution or laws or treaties of the United States.” 28

USC § 2254(a). 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 applicant or person

detained is not entitled thereto.” Id § 2243. 

B

Petitioner seeks federal habeas corpus relief on the

ground that the disciplinary finding that resulted in the forfeiture

of thirty days of time credits and loss of certain privileges is not

supported by the evidence. Liberally construed, the claim appears

cognizable under § 2254 and merits an answer from respondent. See

Zichko v Idaho, 247 F3d 1015, 1020 (9th Cir 2001) (federal courts

must construe pro se petitions for writs of habeas corpus

liberally).

II 

For the foregoing reasons and for good cause shown,

1. The clerk shall serve by certified mail a copy of

this order and the petition, and all attachments thereto, on

Case 3:09-cv-05034-JW Document 4 Filed 01/27/10 Page 2 of 4
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

3

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. 

2. 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 Rule 5 of the Rules Governing

Section 2254 Cases, showing cause why a writ of habeas corpus should

not be granted. Respondent shall file with the answer and serve on

petitioner a copy of all portions of the state trial record that

have been transcribed previously and that are relevant to a

determination of the issues presented by the petition. 

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 (30) days of his receipt of the answer.

3. In lieu of an answer, respondent may file a motion to

dismiss on procedural grounds as set forth in the Advisory Committee

Notes to Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases. If

respondent files such a motion, petitioner shall file with the court

and serve on respondent an opposition or statement of non-opposition

within thirty (30) days of receipt of the motion, and respondent

shall file with the court and serve on petitioner a reply within

fifteen (15) days of receipt of any opposition.

//

//

//

//

//

Case 3:09-cv-05034-JW Document 4 Filed 01/27/10 Page 3 of 4
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

4

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 also must keep the

court and all parties informed of any change of address. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

 

VAUGHN R WALKER

United States District Chief Judge

G:\PRO-SE\VRW\HC.09\Ballesteros-09-5034-osc.wpd

Case 3:09-cv-05034-JW Document 4 Filed 01/27/10 Page 4 of 4