Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-03845/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-03845-0/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

RICHARD CARDONA,

Petitioner,

 vs.

ANTHONY P. KANE, Warden,

Respondent. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C 06-3845 CRB (PR)

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Petitioner, a state prisoner incarcerated at the Correctional Training

Facility in Soledad, California, has filed a pro se petition for a writ of habeas

corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging the California Board of Prison Terms'

("BPT") May 11, 2005 decision to deny him parole. 

BACKGROUND

On February 4, 1986, petitioner was convicted of second degree murder in

the Superior Court of the State of California in and for the County of Orange and

was sentenced to an indeterminate term of 15 years to life with the possibility of

parole. 

Petitioner has been denied parole each time he has appeared before the

BPT. On April 19, 2006, the Supreme Court of California denied his challenge

to the BPT's decision of May 11, 2005.

Case 3:06-cv-03845-CRB Document 3 Filed 11/13/06 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

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 BPT's May 11, 2005

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

not comport with due process. Among other things, petitioner contends that the

decision is not supported by some evidence in the record having an indicia of

reliability, and that it implicates the validity of his plea agreement. Liberally

construed, petitioner’s claims appear colorable under § 2254 and merit an answer

from respondent. See Saas 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 3:06-cv-03845-CRB Document 3 Filed 11/13/06 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

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: November 13, 2006 CHARLES R. BREYER

United States District Judge

Case 3:06-cv-03845-CRB Document 3 Filed 11/13/06 Page 3 of 3