Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_15-cv-02010/USCOURTS-cand-4_15-cv-02010-3/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 Californi

a

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

ANGEL R. PEREZ, 

Petitioner, 

v. 

CLARK E. DUCART, 

Respondent. 

Case No. 15-cv-02010-JSW 

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 

Re: Docket No. 7 

Petitioner, Angel R. Perez (“Petitioner”), a state prisoner, has filed a consolidated petition 

for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254.1

BACKGROUND 

Following a jury trial, Petitioner was convicted of, inter alia, six counts of second degree 

robbery, in violation of California Penal Code sections 211 and 212.5(c), two counts of reckless 

evading, in violation of Vehicle Code section 2800.2(a), and one count of vandalism, in violation 

of California Penal Code section 594(a). Petitioner currently is serving a sentence of 47 years and 

8 months in prison. 

DISCUSSION 

A. Legal Standard. 

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). The 

 

1

 On May 5, 2015, Petitioned filed his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. On August 20, 

2015, Petitioner filed an amended petition, and the Court directed him to file a consolidated 

petition. On September 4, 2015, Petitioner filed his consolidated petition for a writ of habeas 

corpus. 

Case 4:15-cv-02010-JSW Document 10 Filed 11/24/15 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

Court 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.” 28 U.S.C. § 2243. 

Summary dismissal is appropriate only where the allegations in the petition are vague or 

conclusory, palpably incredible, or patently frivolous or false. See Hendricks v. Vasquez, 908 F.2d 

490, 491 (9th Cir. 1990). 

B. Petitioner’s Legal Claims. 

Petitioner asserts two claims for relief: (1) the trial court violated his due process rights 

when it denied his motion for a new trial; and (2) counsel was ineffective because he failed to file 

a motion to suppress evidence. Liberally construed, the claims appear potentially colorable under 

28 U.S.C. section 2254 and merit an answer from Respondent. 

CONCLUSION 

For the foregoing reasons and for good cause shown: 

1. Petitioner shall serve 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. 

 2. Respondent shall file with the Court and serve on Petitioner, within ninety-one (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. 

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 twenty-eight (28) days of the date the answer is 

filed. 

4. Respondent may, within ninety-one (91) days, file 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, Respondent need not 

notice the motion for hearing. Petitioner shall file with the Court and serve on Respondent an 

Case 4:15-cv-02010-JSW Document 10 Filed 11/24/15 Page 2 of 3
United States District Court 

Northern District of Californi

a

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 

opp

file

day

Da

position or s

ed, and Resp

ys of the dat

IT IS S

ated: Novem

statement of 

pondent shall

e any opposi

SO ORDER

mber 24, 201

non-opposit

l file with th

ition is filed

RED. 

5 

3

tion within tw

he Court and 

d. The motio

wenty-eight 

d serve on Pe

on shall be d

__

JE

Un

(28) days of

etitioner a rep

decided on th

___________

EFFREY S. W

nited States D

f the date the

ply within fo

he papers. 

__________

WHITE 

District Judg

e motion is 

ourteen (14)

____ 

ge 

Case 4:15-cv-02010-JSW Document 10 Filed 11/24/15 Page 3 of 3