Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-02853/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-02853-0/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)

---

U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

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

1 A similar petition relating to earlier denials of parole is currently pending

before this Court, pursuant to this Court’s order denying a motion to amend the petition

without prejudice to filing a new action. Although Petitioner has requested that the Court

take judicial notice of the earlier filed action, he has not sought to have the two cases related

or consolidated.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

HAROLD H. HAWKS,

Petitioner,

 v.

ANTHONY P. KANE,

Respondent.

 /

No. C 05-2853 JSW

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Petitioner, Harold H. Hawks, a state prisoner, has filed a petition for a writ of habeas

corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254.1

BACKGROUND

Petitioner was convicted by a jury of one count of murder in the second degree with the

use of a firearm (Cal. Penal Code §§ 187, 12022.5) and was sentenced to 15 years to life in state

prison, with a two year enhancement as a result of the use of the firearm.

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; and (2) the Board has violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment

Case 3:05-cv-02853-JSW Document 5 Filed 08/17/05 Page 1 of 2
U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

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

to the United States Constitution by its repeated denials of parole to Petitioner. 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: August 17, 2005 

JEFFREY S. WHITE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:05-cv-02853-JSW Document 5 Filed 08/17/05 Page 2 of 2