Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_14-cv-04475/USCOURTS-cand-5_14-cv-04475-0/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

1

 On October 6, 2014, Hernandez consented to magistrate judge jurisdiction.

Case No. C 14-4475 PSG (PR)

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY PETITION SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR

FAILURE TO EXHAUST STATE REMEDIES

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DISVISION

PAUL HERNANDEZ,

Petitioner,

 v.

SANTA CLARA COUNTY,

Respondent. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. C 14-4475 PSG (PR)

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY

PETITION SHOULD NOT BE

DISMISSED FOR FAILURE TO

EXHAUST STATE REMEDIES

Paul Hernandez, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, seeks a writ of habeas corpus

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254.1

 Hernandez has paid the filing fee. The court issues an order to

show cause for Hernandez to demonstrate why the petition should not be dismissed without

prejudice because he has not exhausted his state court remedies.

BACKGROUND

In the underlying federal petition, Hernandez challenges the criminal judgment imposed

upon him on July 31, 2013, following a guilty plea in the Superior Court of Santa Clara County. 

Hernandez concedes that he has not raised any claims in the California Supreme Court.

Case 5:14-cv-04475-PSG Document 4 Filed 01/22/15 Page 1 of 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

2

 See 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b)-(c). 

Case No. C 14-4475 PSG (PR)

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY PETITION SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR

FAILURE TO EXHAUST STATE REMEDIES

2

DISCUSSION

Prisoners in state custody who wish to collaterally challenge either the fact or length of

their confinement in federal habeas corpus proceedings are first required to exhaust state judicial

remedies, either on direct appeal or through collateral proceedings, by presenting the highest

state court available with a fair opportunity to rule on the merits of each and every claim they

seek to raise in federal court.2

 

At the time Hernandez filed the federal petition, it appeared that Hernandez had been

convicted of criminal charges but he had not filed a direct appeal or pursued any other state

proceeding challenging his criminal convictions except for one state habeas petition filed in the

Superior Court. Thus, the court issues an order to show cause for Hernandez to demonstrate why

the petition should not be dismissed without prejudice to refiling once he exhausts his federal

claims in state court. 

Hernandez shall file a response within thirty (30) days of the filing date of this order

addressing: (1) whether he has a habeas petition, appeal, or other post-conviction proceeding

now pending before the state court; and, if so, (2) whether the underlying petition challenges the

same commitment at issue in his pending state case(s). Failure to file a timely response will

result in the court dismissing the instant petition without prejudice for failure to exhaust state

court remedies. 

It is Hernandez’s responsibility to prosecute this case. He 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: PAUL S. GREWAL 

United States Magistrate Judge

12/29/2014

Case 5:14-cv-04475-PSG Document 4 Filed 01/22/15 Page 2 of 2