Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_06-cv-07462/USCOURTS-cand-4_06-cv-07462-2/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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

OAKLAND DIVISION

HECTOR ARMANDO RODRIGUEZ,

Petitioner,

 vs.

DERRAL ADAMAS, Warden,

Respondent. /

No. C 06-7462 PJH (PR)

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

This is a habeas case filed pro se by a state prisoner. Respondent’s motion to

dismiss the petition as mixed was granted. The court ordered petitioner to elect among the

three choices available to petitioners whose petition is mixed, but he appeared not to

respond, so the case was dismissed. Petitioner moved to reopen and established that he

had in fact responded within the time allowed, but for reasons unknown the response had

failed to reach the docket. The motion to reopen was granted and petitioner was ordered to

file an amended petition reflecting his election to proceed with the exhausted issue. He has

done so.

As grounds for habeas relief, petitioner alleges that in Contra Costa County the

Public Defender’s Office and the Alternative Defender’s Office do not maintain adequate

separation, so his right to conflict-free counsel was violated. This claim is sufficient to

proceed. 

CONCLUSION 

1. The clerk shall serve by regular 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. 

Case 4:06-cv-07462-PJH Document 33 Filed 04/14/10 Page 1 of 2
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

2. Respondent shall file with the court and serve on petitioner, within sixty 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 days of his receipt of the answer.

3. 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 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 days of

receipt of the motion, and respondent shall file with the court and serve on petitioner a reply

within fifteen days of receipt of any opposition.

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

must keep the court informed of any change of address and must comply with the court's

orders in a timely fashion. Failure to do so may result in the dismissal of this action for

failure to prosecute pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). See Martinez v.

Johnson, 104 F.3d 769, 772 (5th Cir. 1997) (Rule 41(b) applicable in habeas cases). 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 14, 2010. 

 PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON

United States District Judge

P:\PRO-SE\PJH\HC.06\RODRIGUEZ,H462.OSC-reopened.wpd 

Case 4:06-cv-07462-PJH Document 33 Filed 04/14/10 Page 2 of 2