Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-05423/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-05423-1/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)

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

SCOTT BRUMETT,

Petitioner,

 v.

ANTHONY KANE, 

Respondent,

and BOARD OF PRISON TERMS and

ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, Governer,

Real Parties in Interest,

 /

No. C 04-05423 JSW

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE AND

DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS

AS MOOT

On June 2, 2005, Respondent filed a motion to dismiss the petition for writ of habeas

corpus filed in this case on December 23, 2004. On July 5, 2005, Petitioner filed his first

amended petition in apparent response to Respondent’s motion.

In his amended petition, Petitioner again seeks federal habeas corpus relief by claiming

the California Board of Prison Terms (“the Board”) has violated the Due Process Clause of the

14th Amendment to the United States Constitution by its repeated denials of parole to

Petitioner; and that the Board has violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment

to the United States Constitution by its repeated denials of parole to Petitioner. Liberally

construed, the claims appear potentially colorable under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 and merit an answer

from Respondents.

Accordingly, for the foregoing reasons and for good cause shown:

1. Petitioner shall serve by certified mail a copy of this Order and the amended

petition and all attachments thereto upon Respondents.

Case 3:04-cv-05423-JSW Document 14 Filed 08/26/05 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

2. Respondents shall file with the Court and serve on Petitioner, within 60 days of

the date 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. Respondents shall file with the answer and serve on

Petitioner a copy of all portions of the administrative record 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 Respondents within 30 days of his receipt of the

answer. 

In light of the filing of the amended petition, the motion to dismiss is DENIED AS

MOOT.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 26, 2005 

JEFFREY S. WHITE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:04-cv-05423-JSW Document 14 Filed 08/26/05 Page 2 of 2