Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_08-cv-00296/USCOURTS-cand-5_08-cv-00296-0/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

P:\pro-se\sj.rmw\hc.08\Corralejo296osc 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

EDWARD DANIEL CORRALEJO,

Petitioner,

 vs.

W.J. SULLIVAN, Warden,

Respondent.

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C 08-0296 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. Petitioner has paid the filing fee. The court orders

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

BACKGROUND

Petitioner was sentenced to fifteen years-to-life in prison after his conviction in the

Los Angeles Superior Court for murder (Cal. Penal Code § 187). Petitioner challenges

his disciplinary rules violation report (“CDC 115”) resulting in a guilty finding that he

participated in a prison riot at the Correctional Training Facility (“CTF”) in Soledad,

California. Petitioner seeks to overturn his guilty finding because he claims that it

prevents his release on parole. Petitioner filed state habeas petitions in the state superior

court which were denied on April 26, 2007 and September 7, 2007. Petitioner filed a

*E-FILED - 4/29/08*

Case 5:08-cv-00296-RMW Document 4 Filed 04/29/08 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

P:\pro-se\sj.rmw\hc.08\Corralejo296osc 2

habeas petition in the state appellate court, which was summarily denied on October 12,

2007. Petitioner filed a habeas petition in the state supreme court, which was summarily

denied on December 12, 2007. Petitioner filed the instant petition on January 16, 2008. 

DISCUSSION

A. Standard of Review

This court may entertain a petition for 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); 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 Claim

Petitioner challenges his prison disciplinary hearing resulting in a guilty finding

that he participated in a prison riot. Petitioner contends that there is no evidence to

support the guilty finding. Petitioner maintains that he has a liberty interest in parole and

that this disciplinary action will prevent the Board of Prison Terms from granting him

parole. See petition at 6-6A. 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 the petitioner. 

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

Case 5:08-cv-00296-RMW Document 4 Filed 04/29/08 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

P:\pro-se\sj.rmw\hc.08\Corralejo296osc 3

not be granted. Respondent shall file with the answer and serve on petitioner a copy of all

portions of the underlying prison disciplinary 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. 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

4/28/08

Case 5:08-cv-00296-RMW Document 4 Filed 04/29/08 Page 3 of 3