Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_08-cv-01907/USCOURTS-cand-5_08-cv-01907-0/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

Order to Show Cause

G:\PRO-SE\SJ.Rmw\HC.08\Madden907oscparole.wpd 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GIFFORD M. MADDEN,

Petitioner,

 vs.

B. CURRY, Warden,

Respondent. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C 08-1907 RMW (PR)

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, seeks a writ of habeas corpus

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging a decision by the California Board of Parole

Hearings (“Board”) finding him unsuitable for parole. Petitioner has paid the filing fee. 

The court orders respondent to show cause why the petition should not be granted. 

STATEMENT

In 1993, petitioner was sentenced to a term of 19 years-to-life in state prison after

his conviction for second degree murder in Orange County Superior Court. At his parole

suitability hearing, the Board found petitioner to be unsuitable for parole. 

DISCUSSION

A. Standard of Review

This court may entertain a petition for writ of habeas corpus “in behalf of a person

*E-FILED - 7/1/08*

Case 5:08-cv-01907-RMW Document 2 Filed 07/03/08 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

Order to Show Cause

G:\PRO-SE\SJ.Rmw\HC.08\Madden907oscparole.wpd 2

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); Rose v. Hodges, 423 U.S. 19, 21 (1975). 

A district court 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.” 28 U.S.C. § 2243. 

B. Petitioner’s Claims

As grounds for federal habeas relief, petitioner claims that the Board’s decision

violates petitioner’s right to due process because there is not “some evidence” to support

the Board’s decision or the factual findings underlying that decision. Liberally construed,

petitioner’s allegations are sufficient to require a response. The court orders respondent

to show cause why the petition should not be granted. 

CONCLUSION 

1. The clerk shall serve by mail a copy of this order and the petition 

and all attachments thereto upon the respondent and the respondent’s attorney, the

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

on petitioner. 

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

days of the date this order is filed, 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 underlying state criminal 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 the date the answer is

filed. 

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

Case 5:08-cv-01907-RMW Document 2 Filed 07/03/08 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

Order to Show Cause

G:\PRO-SE\SJ.Rmw\HC.08\Madden907oscparole.wpd 3

Governing Section 2254 Cases within ninety days of the date this order is filed. 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 the date the motion is

filed, and respondent shall file with the court and serve on petitioner a reply within fifteen

days of the date the opposition is filed. 

4. It is petitioner’s responsibility to prosecute this case. 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 and all

parties informed of any change of address by filing a separate paper captioned “Notice of

Change of Address.” He 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).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: RONALD M. WHYTE 

United States District Judge

7/1/08

Case 5:08-cv-01907-RMW Document 2 Filed 07/03/08 Page 3 of 3