Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_09-cv-01872/USCOURTS-caed-1_09-cv-01872-1/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)

---

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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ROBERT GONZALEZ GALVAN, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

)

v. )

)

)

JIM HAMLET, )

)

Respondent. )

 )

1:09-cv-01872-JLT HC

ORDER DIRECTING PETITIONER TO FILE

AMENDED PETITION WITHIN THIRTY DAYS

ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO

SEND PETITIONER BLANK FORM PETITION

Petitioner is a prisoner proceeding with a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 2254. 

 The instant petition was originally filed on October 23, 2009, on a form entitled “Petition for

Issuance of Certificate of Appealability on Appeal From Denial of Writ of Habeas Corpus.” (Doc.

1). In his filing, Petitioner alleges that his petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 was denied in this

Court on June 11, 2008, and that he filed a notice of appeal from said denial. (Doc. 1, p. 2). 

However, Petitioner does not indicate the prior case number in this Court, the nature of the claims

raised in that previous petition, nor does he indicate the present status of his appeal from the Court’s

denial of that petition. Rather, he appears to be raising anew the issues in this “petition” relating to

the restitution fine imposed in his state court sentence. 

///

Case 1:09-cv-01872-JLT Document 6 Filed 01/19/10 Page 1 of 4
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 Petitioners are not precluded from submitting attachments or exhibits to the petition, however, the Court will not 1

determine a petitioner's claims for him based solely on his attachments. 

DISCUSSION

Rule 4 of the Rules Governing § 2254 Cases requires the Court to make a preliminary review

of each petition for writ of habeas corpus. The Court must dismiss a petition "[i]f it plainly appears

from the face of the petition . . . that the petitioner is not entitled to relief." Rule 4 of the Rules

Governing 2254 Cases; Hendricks v. Vasquez, 908 F.2d 490 (9th Cir. 1990). Otherwise, the Court

will order Respondent to respond to the petition. Rule 5 of the Rules governing § 2254 Cases.

A federal court may only grant a petition for writ of habeas corpus if a petitioner can show

that “he is in custody in violation of the Constitution . . . .” 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (a). A petition for writ

of habeas corpus must therefore specify the grounds for relief. Rule 2(c) of the Rules Governing

Section 2254 Cases. The petition must also allege the facts surrounding the petitioner’s

incarceration. 28 U.S.C. § 2242. The petitioner must make specific factual allegations that would

entitle him to habeas corpus relief if they are true. O’Bremski v. Maass, 915 F.2d 418, 420 (9th Cir.

1990); United States v. Poopola, 881 F.2d 811, 812 (9th Cir. 1989). In addition, a petition presented

in pro se must be upon the form approved by the court. Rule 2 of the Rules Governing Section 2254

Cases; Local Rule 190. This rule ensures that all information needed is before the court. Each

ground for relief must be clearly stated and allege what federal constitutional violation has occurred,

along with providing facts that support the grounds for relief. If a petition contains no grounds

entitling the petitioner to habeas corpus relief, the Court must dismiss the petition. Rule 4 of the

Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases. 

Filing an incomplete or incorrect form petition is inadequate, and requires the Court to

expend considerable time and resources attempting to determine which claims Petitioner seeks to

raise before this Court. It is unreasonable to expect the Court to take on such a task when the

responsibility to inform the Court lies solely with Petitioner. The proper use of the form petition 1

results in administrative convenience of benefit to both Petitioner and the Court. 

Here, Petitioner has filed his petition on a form that purports to seek a certificate of

appealability for an appeal he has initiated as to a prior petition that was either denied or dismissed. 

Case 1:09-cv-01872-JLT Document 6 Filed 01/19/10 Page 2 of 4
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

Petitioner should note that a one year period of limitations exists for cases filed pursuant to §2254. In most cases, 2

the one year limitation period starts to run on the date the California Supreme Court denied the petitioner’s direct review.

The limitations period is tolled while a properly filed request for post-conviction or other collateral review is pending in state

court. 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(2). However, the running of the limitation period is not tolled for the time an application for postconviction or collateral review is pending in federal court. Duncan v. Walker, 533 U.S. 167, 181 (2001); see also, Sperling

v. White, 30 F. Supp.2d 1246, 1250 (C.D. Cal. 1998).

If, on the other hand, Petitioner is truly seeking only the issuance of a certificate of appealability in a prior petition, 3

Petitioner should notify the Court of that fact and provide information regarding the case number for the prior petition for

which a certificate of appealability is requested. The Court will then dismiss the instant petition and improperly opened and

rule on the request for a certificate of appealability under the case number of the prior petition.

However, as mentioned, Petitioner provides no further information regarding the prior proceedings,

and the Court has been unable to locate any prior proceedings in this Court under Petitioner’s name. 

Without such basic information as when Petitioner was convicted, in what court Petitioner

was convicted, the dates of his direct appeal, if any, and the efforts, if any, Petitioner has made to

present his claims to the California Supreme Court, the Court is unable to undertake its statutory

duty to preliminarily screen the petition and make a preliminary determination whether Petitioner’s

claims have been exhausted or whether Petitioner has filed his petition within the applicable statute

of limitations period pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §2244(d)(1). 

2

However, the Court will provide Petitioner with the opportunity to file an amended petition

on the proper form for a federal writ of habeas corpus. Petitioner must fill out the form habeas

corpus petition in its entirety for the Court to properly conduct its preliminary screening duties. In

his amended petition, Petitioner must also tell the Court which claims were raised, in which courts,

and when those courts denied said claims. This information must include the dates of filing and

disposition in order to allow the Court to determine whether Petitioner has exhausted his state

remedies and is in compliance with the limitations period prescribed by 28 U.S.C. §2244(d)(1). 

Without this information, the Court cannot proceed to the merits of the petition. Thus, Petitioner

must resubmit the form petition once it has been completely filled out as stated on the form. 

3

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED:

1. Petitioner SHALL AMEND THE PETITION to state the grounds raised at each court

and the date each court ruled on each petition for writ of habeas corpus by filling out

the form petition in its entirety within thirty (30) days of the date of service of this

Case 1:09-cv-01872-JLT Document 6 Filed 01/19/10 Page 3 of 4
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

order. The amended petition should be clearly and boldly titled “AMENDED

PETITION,” contain the appropriate case number, and be an original signed under

penalty of perjury. Petitioner should also note that every pleading to which an

amendment is permitted must be retyped or rewritten and filed so that it is complete

in itself without reference to the prior or superseded pleading. Local Rule 15-220. 

2. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to send Petitioner a blank form petition for federal

prisoners filing pursuant to § 2254. 

Petitioner is forewarned that his failure to comply with this order may result in a

Recommendation that the Petition be dismissed pursuant to Local Rule 110.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 19, 2010 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston 

9j7khi UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

Case 1:09-cv-01872-JLT Document 6 Filed 01/19/10 Page 4 of 4