Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-02558/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-02558-3/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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MARTIN VAN ZANTEN,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-05-2558 MCE PAN P

vs.

J. S. WOODFORD, et al.,

Respondents. ORDER

 /

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding without counsel, applied for a writ of

habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 and requested leave to proceed in forma pauperis.

Examination of the in forma pauperis affidavit reveals petitioner is unable to

afford the costs of suit. Leave to proceed in forma pauperis is granted. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a).

A judge “entertaining an application for a writ of habeas corpus shall forthwith

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.

Petitioner alleges respondent violated his right to due process under Valdivia v.

Schwarzenegger, Civ. S 94-0671 LKK GGH by failing to hold a parole revocation hearing within

35 days. He seeks an order directing that the petition to revoke probation be dismissed and that

Case 2:05-cv-02558-MCE -EFB Document 17 Filed 05/26/06 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

2

he immediately be released from custody. On August 20, 2005, authorities placed a parole hold

on petitioner and on November 16, 2005, authorities held a final revocation hearing, at which

they found petitioner violated the conditions of his parole. Petitioner was returned to custody for

one year.

Pursuant to the March 9, 2004, Stipulated Order for Permanent Injunctive Relief

made in Valdivia v. Schwarzenegger, Civ. S 94-0671 LKK GGH, California parole officials have

35 days from the placement of a parole hold to have a final revocation hearing for parolees who

do not waive or seek a continuance of a final revocation hearing. This court retained jurisdiction

to enforce the order through specific performance and all other remedies permitted by law or

equity. 

A petitioner may obtain habeas corpus relief, i.e., release and dismissal of the

parole violation allegations, only if he can show the delay was unreasonable and prejudiced him. 

Hooper v. U.S. v. Parole Com’n, 702 F.2d 842, 845 (9th Cir. 1983). Petitioner does not allege

he did not have a timely probable cause hearing or that the delay prejudiced him in defending

against the grounds for revocation. 

It appears there is no basis for relief.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Petitioner has 30 days from the date of this order to file an amended petition

showing there may be a basis for relief.

DATED: May 24, 2006.

\004

\van2558.ord to amend

Case 2:05-cv-02558-MCE -EFB Document 17 Filed 05/26/06 Page 2 of 2