Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-04569/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-04569-0/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

ULLYSSES PAUL CUEN, 

Petitioner,

 vs.

M. S. EVANS, Warden, 

Respondent.

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C 05-4569 JSW (PR)

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

INTRODUCTION

Petitioner, a prisoner of the State of California who is incarcerated at Salinas Valley State

Prison, in Soledad, California, has filed a habeas corpus petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254

challenging the constitutional validity of his state conviction. Petitioner has paid the filing fee. 

This order directs Respondent to show cause why the petition should not be granted.

BACKGROUND

According to the petition, Petitioner was convicted of arson in Santa Clara County

Superior Court. On October 25, 2002, Petitioner was sentenced to 34 years-to-life in prison. 

Petitioner appealed his conviction to the California Court of Appeal, which affirmed the

conviction, and to the Supreme Court of California, which denied Petitioner's petition for review

in 2004. Petitioner filed the instant petition on November 8, 2005.

DISCUSSION

I. Standard of Review

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

Case 3:05-cv-04569-JSW Document 3 Filed 05/15/06 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

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. 

II. Legal Claims

The petition raises the following grounds for relief: (1) the trial court violated

Petitioner’s right to counsel in denying his motion to substitute counsel; (2) trial counsel was

ineffective for conceding the crime of assault to the jury and failing to object to expert

testimony at the competency hearing; and (3) the court’s finding of competency violated

Petitioner’s right to due process. As it does not appear from the face of the petition that

Petitioner is not entitled to relief, Respondent is ordered to respond to the petition as set forth

below.

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 M. S. Evans, Respondent, Warden of Salinas Valley State Prison and

Respondent's attorney, the Attorney General of the State of California. The Clerk also shall serve

a copy of this order on Petitioner. 

3. 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.

Case 3:05-cv-04569-JSW Document 3 Filed 05/15/06 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

4. 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 (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.

5. It is Petitioner’s responsibility to prosecute this case. Petitioner must keep 

the Court 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: May 15, 2006 JEFFREY S. WHITE

United States District Judge

Case 3:05-cv-04569-JSW Document 3 Filed 05/15/06 Page 3 of 3