Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_18-cv-06235/USCOURTS-cand-4_18-cv-06235-0/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)

---

Case No. 18-cv-06235 NC (PR)

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

1

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

CHRISTOPHER MANCINAS,

Petitioner,

v.

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF 

CALIFORNIA,

 Respondent.

Case No. 18-cv-06235 NC (PR) 

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, seeks a writ of habeas corpus pursuant 

to 28 U.S.C. § 2254.1

 Petitioner’s filing fee is due on January 7, 2019. For the reasons 

that follow, the court orders Respondent to show cause why the petition should not be 

granted.

///

 1 Petitioner has consented to magistrate judge jurisdiction. Dkt. No. 4.

Case 4:18-cv-06235-YGR Document 8 Filed 11/28/18 Page 1 of 3
Case No. 18-cv-06235 NC (PR)

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

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

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); Rose v. Hodges, 423 U.S. 19, 21 (1975). 

A district 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) (quoting Blackledge v. Allison, 431 U.S. 63, 75-76 (1977)).

B. Petitioner’s Claim

Petitioner raises one claim in his federal petition: whether there was insufficient 

evidence to convict him for actively participating in a criminal street gang under California 

Penal Code section 182.66(a). The court orders Respondent to show cause why the 

petition should not be granted as to this claim.

CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons:

1. The Clerk of the Court is directed to serve a Magistrate Judge jurisdiction 

consent form, 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. 

Respondent shall file his Magistrate Judge jurisdiction consent form no later than thirty 

(30) days from the filing date of this Order.

2. Respondent is directed to file with the court and serve on Petitioner, within sixty 

Case 4:18-cv-06235-YGR Document 8 Filed 11/28/18 Page 2 of 3
Case No. 18-cv-06235 NC (PR)

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

(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 based on the claim found cognizable herein. Respondent must 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 issue

presented by the petition. 

If Petitioner wishes to respond to the answer, he must do so by filing a traverse with 

the Court and serving it on Respondent within thirty (30) days of the date the answer is 

filed.

3. Respondent may file, within sixty (60) 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 must 

file with the Court and serve on Respondent an opposition or statement of non-opposition 

within twenty-eight (28) days of the date the motion is filed, and Respondent must file 

with the court and serve on Petitioner a reply within fourteen (14) days of the date any 

opposition is filed.

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 keep the court informed of any change of address and must comply with the court’s 

orders in a timely fashion. Failure to do so may result in the dismissal of this action for 

failure to prosecute pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: 

NATHANAEL M. COUSINS

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 4:18-cv-06235-YGR Document 8 Filed 11/28/18 Page 3 of 3