Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_15-cv-01407/USCOURTS-cand-5_15-cv-01407-0/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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MICHAEL BLANCHARD,

Plaintiff,

v.

LAURA GARNETTE, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 15-cv-01407-JSC 

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Re: Dkt. No. 1

Petitioner, on probation and therefore in custody of the State of California, filed a habeas 

corpus petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner has paid the $5.00 filing fee. His petition 

sets forth a single claim challenging the constitutionality of petitioner’s convictions in state court: 

that he received ineffective assistance of trial counsel based on counsel’s failure to seek to exclude

evidence that petitioner’s credit card was declined. The claim, when liberally construed, is 

cognizable and potentially meritorious. Good cause appearing, Respondent is hereby ordered to 

show cause why the petition should not be granted.

In order to expedite the resolution of this case, it is further ordered as follows:

1. Petitioner shall serve respondent and the respondent’s attorney, the Attorney General of 

the State of California, with a copy of this order and the petition with all attachments. 

2. Respondent shall file with the court and serve on petitioner, within 91 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 based on 

the claims found cognizable herein. 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. 

Case 5:15-cv-01407-EJD Document 4 Filed 04/15/15 Page 1 of 2
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 California

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 28 days of the date the answer is filed.

3. Respondent may file, within 91 days, 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 28 days of the date the 

motion is filed, and respondent shall file with the court and serve on petitioner a reply within 14 

days of the date any opposition is filed.

4. The Clerk shall send a notice to respondent regarding consenting to the jurisdiction of a 

magistrate judge.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 15, 2015

________________________

JACQUELINE SCOTT CORLEY

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 5:15-cv-01407-EJD Document 4 Filed 04/15/15 Page 2 of 2