Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-00734/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-00734-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
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

RUSSELL TRUNZO,

Petitioner,

 v.

JILL BROWN, Warden of San Quentin State

Prison, and THE BOARD OF PRISON

TERMS, and ARNOLD SCHWAZENEGGER,

Governor, real parties in interest,

Respondents. /

No. C 05-00734 JSW

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Movant, Russell Trunzo, a state prisoner, has filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254.

BACKGROUND

Petitioner was convicted by a jury of one count of murder in the second degree (Cal.

Penal Code (§187) and was sentenced to 15 years to life in state prison.

LEGAL CLAIMS

Petitioner does not challenge the validity of his underlying conviction or the resulting

sentence. Rather, Petitioner seeks federal habeas corpus relief by raising the following claims:

(1) 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; (2) 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; and (3) the Board’s

repeated denials of his parole constitutes cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eight

Case 3:05-cv-00734-JSW Document 10 Filed 07/15/05 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

Amendment. Liberally construed, the claims appear potentially colorable under 28 U.S.C. §

2254 and merit an answer from Respondents.

CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons and for good cause shown:

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

all attachments thereto upon Respondents.

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. Respondent 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. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 15, 2005 /s/ Jeffrey S. White 

JEFFREY S. WHITE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:05-cv-00734-JSW Document 10 Filed 07/15/05 Page 2 of 2