Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-05188/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-05188-0/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 W. BROWN,

Petitioner,

 vs.

A KANE, Warden, et al,

Respondent(s). 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C 05-5188 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 decision of the Governor of the

State of California to revoke a parole date granted him by the California Board of

Prison Terms ("BPT"). 

BACKGROUND

Petitioner was convicted by a jury in the Superior Court of the State of

California in and for the County of Ventura of second degree murder and, on

August 1, 1980, was sentenced to 15 years to life in state prison. 

Petitioner was found not suitable for parole the first nine times he 

appeared before the BPT. At his tenth hearing, the BPT found petitioner suitable

for parole and set a parole date; however, the Governor reversed the BPT's parole

suitability determination and revoked the parole date.

Case 3:05-cv-05188-CRB Document 5 Filed 03/24/06 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

Petitioner has unsuccessfully challenged the Governor's decision in the

state courts. On October 26, 2005, the Supreme Court of California denied his

final petition for state habeas relief. 

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 decision of the

Governor to revoke a parole date granted him by the BPT. Among other things,

petitioner claims that the Governor’s decision is not supported by the evidence

and that it violated the Ex Post Facto Clause. Liberally construed, petitioner’s

claims appear colorable under § 2254 and merit an answer from respondent. See

McQuillion v. Duncan, 306 F.3d 895, 902-03 (9th Cir. 2002) (decision to rescind

previously-granted parole release date implicated prisoner’s liberty interest in

release on parole which cannot be denied without adequate procedural due

process protections); see also Biggs v. Terhune, 334 F.3d 910, 914-15 (9th Cir.

2003) (refusal to set parole date for prisoner implicated prisoner’s liberty interest

in release on parole).

/

/

Case 3:05-cv-05188-CRB Document 5 Filed 03/24/06 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

CONCLUSION 

For the foregoing reasons and for good cause shown,

1. Petitioner’s request for leave to proceed in forma pauperis under 28

U.S.C. § 1915 is GRANTED.

2. The clerk shall serve by certified mail a copy of this order and the

petition and all attachments thereto on respondent, 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

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. 

4. 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: March 24 2006 CHARLES R. BREYER

United States District Judge

Case 3:05-cv-05188-CRB Document 5 Filed 03/24/06 Page 3 of 3