Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-04829/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-04829-0/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CHRISTOPHER G. MARKHAM,

Petitioner,

 vs.

R. GROUNDS, Acting Warden,

Respondent. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C 09-4829 CRB (PR)

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Petitioner, a state prisoner incarcerated at the Correctional Training

Facility in Soledad, filed a pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28

U.S.C. § 2254 challenging the California Board of Parole Hearings' ("BPH")

February 6, 2008 decision to deny him parole. 

BACKGROUND

On October 13, 1987, petitioner was sentenced to an indeterminate term of

15 years to life in state prison after a jury in Los Angeles County Superior Court

found him guilty of first degree murder. 

Petitioner has been found not suitable for parole each time he has appeared

before the BPH. On August 19, 2009, the Supreme Court of California denied

review of his challenge to the BPH's decision of February 6, 2008.

Case 3:09-cv-04829-CRB Document 2 Filed 03/15/10 Page 1 of 3
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

DISCUSSION

A. Standard of Review

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 U.S.C. § 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. Legal Claims

Petitioner seeks federal habeas corpus relief from the BPH's February 6, 

2008 decision finding him not suitable for parole on the ground that the decision

does not comport with due process. Petitioner specifically claims that the

decision is not supported by some evidence demonstrating that he poses a current

unreasonable threat to the public if released on parole. Liberally construed,

petitioner's claim appears colorable under § 2254 and merits an answer from

respondent. See Sass v. Cal. Bd. of Prison Terms, 461 F.3d 1123, 1127-29 (9th

Cir. 2006) (finding that refusal to set parole date for prisoner with 15-to-life

sentence implicated prisoner’s liberty interest in release on parole which cannot

be denied without adequate procedural due process protections). Biggs v.

Terhune, 334 F.3d 910, 914-15 (9th Cir. 2003) (same).

CONCLUSION 

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 respondent and respondent's attorney, the

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

Case 3:09-cv-04829-CRB Document 2 Filed 03/15/10 Page 2 of 3
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

this order on petitioner. 

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

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 issued. 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. 

3. 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 30 days of his

receipt of the answer. 

SO ORDERED.

DATED: March 12, 2010 CHARLES R. BREYER

United States District Judge

G:\PRO-SE\CRB\HC.09\Markham, C1.osc.wpd

Case 3:09-cv-04829-CRB Document 2 Filed 03/15/10 Page 3 of 3