Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-03992/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-03992-0/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

MICHAEL B. TENORE,

Petitioner,

 vs.

ROSANNE CAMPTBELL, Warden,

Respondent. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C 06-3992 CRB (PR)

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Petitioner, a state prisoner incarcerated at Mule Creek State Prison, has

filed a pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. 

BACKGROUND

Petitioner was convicted of four counts of aggravated sexual assault on a

child under the age of 14, one count of lewd act on a child, two counts of use of a

minor in material involving sexual content, and one count of attempted

destruction of evidence, following a court trial in the Superior Court of the State

of California in and for the County of Santa Clara. On August 9, 2002, he was

sentenced to a determinate prison term of eight years plus a consecutive term of

15 years to life. 

Case 3:06-cv-03992-CRB Document 5 Filed 11/15/06 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

On January 29, 2004, the California Court of Appeal affirmed the

judgment of the trial court and, on April 14, 2004, the Supreme Court of

California denied review.

Petitioner the began seeking collateral relief from the state courts. On

June 14, 2006, the Supreme Court of California denied his final petition for state

habeas relief. The instant federal habeas petition promptly followed.

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. Claims

Petitioner seeks federal habeas corpus relief by raising several claims,

including that he was denied his constitutional right to confrontation and crossexamination, and that he received ineffective assistance of counsel. Liberally

construed, the claims appear cognizable under § 2254 and merit an answer from

respondent. See Zichko v. Idaho, 247 F.3d 1015, 1020 (9th Cir. 2001) (federal

courts must construe pro se petitions for writs of habeas corpus liberally).

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

Case 3:06-cv-03992-CRB Document 5 Filed 11/15/06 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

Attorney General of the State of California. The clerk also shall serve a copy of

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 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. 

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.

3. Respondent may 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,

petitioner shall file with the court and serve on respondent an opposition or

statement of non-opposition within 30 days of receipt of the motion, and

respondent shall file with the court and serve on petitioner a reply within 15 days

of receipt of any opposition.

4. Petitioner is reminded that all communications with the court must

be served on respondent by mailing a true copy of the document to respondent’s

counsel. Petitioner must also keep the court and all parties informed of any

change of address. 

SO ORDERED.

DATED: Nov. 15, 2006 CHARLES R. BREYER

United States District Judge

Case 3:06-cv-03992-CRB Document 5 Filed 11/15/06 Page 3 of 3