Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_19-cv-03942/USCOURTS-cand-3_19-cv-03942-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:1651 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus

---

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 

Northern District of Californi

a

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

RONNIE LOUVIER, 

Petitioner, 

v. 

ROBERT NEUSCHMID, 

Respondent. 

Case No. 19-cv-03942-JD 

ORDER RE APPOINTED 

COUNSEL AND STAY 

Petitioner, a state prisoner, filed a pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 

U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner was convicted in San Francisco County which is in this district, so 

venue is proper here. See 28 U.S.C. § 2241(d). He has paid the filing fee. 

BACKGROUND 

In 2009, a jury found petitioner guilty of murder, intentional discharge of a firearm, 

unlawful possession of a firearm, possession of cocaine base and possession of a controlled 

substance. Petition at 1. In 2012 the California Court of Appeal affirmed the conviction and the 

California Supreme Court denied review. Id. at 15-16. Petitioner filed various state habeas 

petitions from 2015 to 2017 containing claims similar to the claims in this petition. Id. at 16. An 

evidentiary hearing was held in 2017 in the superior court, but the petition was denied. Id. at 17. 

The California Supreme Court denied review on July 11, 2018. Id. 

DISCUSSION 

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). Habeas corpus petitions must meet heightened pleading 

requirements. McFarland v. Scott, 512 U.S. 849, 856 (1994). An application for a federal writ of 

Case 3:19-cv-03942-JD Document 8 Filed 09/04/19 Page 1 of 3
2 

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 

Northern District of Californi

a

habeas corpus filed by a prisoner who is in state custody pursuant to a judgment of a state court 

must “specify all the grounds for relief available to the petitioner ... [and] state the facts supporting 

each ground.” Rule 2(c) of the Rules Governing § 2254 Cases, 28 U.S.C. § 2254. “‘[N]otice’ 

pleading is not sufficient, for the petition is expected to state facts that point to a ‘real possibility 

of constitutional error.’” Rule 4 Advisory Committee Notes (quoting Aubut v. Maine, 431 F.2d 

688, 689 (1st Cir. 1970)). 

LEGAL CLAIMS 

As grounds for federal habeas relief, petitioner asserts that: (1) he is actually innocent; (2) 

he received ineffective assistance of counsel; (3) there was juror misconduct; (4) his due process 

rights were violated under Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963); and (5) there was cumulative 

error. Petitioner has also filed a motion to stay the case while he exhausts some or all of these 

claims. 

The Sixth Amendment right to counsel does not apply in habeas corpus actions. Knaubert 

v. Goldsmith, 791 F.2d 722, 728 (9th Cir. 1986). But 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2)(B) authorizes a 

district court to appoint counsel to represent a habeas petitioner whenever “the court determines 

that the interests of justice so require.” The Court finds that the interests of justice warrant the 

appointment of counsel. There are complex issues of law and possibly complicated procedural 

issues that may need to be addressed. This matter is REFERRED to the Federal Public Defender 

to find representation for petitioner. If petitioner does not want to be represented by an attorney or 

if he is financially able to employ counsel, he must inform the Court as soon as possible. 

The Clerk is asked to serve a copy of this order to the Office of the Federal Public 

Defender to obtain a lawyer for the Court to appoint. The case is STAYED pending further order. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: September 4, 2019 

 

JAMES DONATO 

United States District Judge

Case 3:19-cv-03942-JD Document 8 Filed 09/04/19 Page 2 of 3
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 

United States District Court 

Northern District of Californi

a

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

RONNIE LOUVIER, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

ROBERT NEUSCHMID, 

Defendant. 

Case No. 19-cv-03942-JD 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S. 

District Court, Northern District of California. 

That on September 4, 2019, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the attached, by 

placing said copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter listed, by 

depositing said envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into an inter-office delivery 

receptacle located in the Clerk's office. 

Ronnie Louvier ID: AH4555 

California State Prison, Solano

P.O. Box 4000 

Vacaville, CA 95696-4000 

Federal Public Defenders Office 

450 Golden Gate Ave. 

Sa Francisco, CA 94102 

Dated: September 4, 2019 

Susan Y. Soong 

Clerk, United States District Court 

By:________________________ 

LISA R. CLARK, Deputy Clerk to the 

Honorable JAMES DONATO 

Case 3:19-cv-03942-JD Document 8 Filed 09/04/19 Page 3 of 3