Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_03-cv-01055/USCOURTS-cand-3_03-cv-01055-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

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

JODY A. JESHURIN,

Petitioner,

 vs.

GLORIA HENRY, Warden, 

Respondent.

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C 03-1055 JSW (PR)

ORDER REOPENING

ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSED CASE

AND TO SHOW CAUSE 

INTRODUCTION

Petitioner, a prisoner of the State of California, has filed a habeas corpus petition

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging the constitutional validity of her state

conviction. On August 4, 2003, this Court issued an order to show cause why the petition

should not be granted. Thereafter, on October 1, 2003, Respondent filed a motion to

dismiss, alleging that the petition contains both exhausted and unexhausted claims (docket

no. 8). On October 17, 2003, Petitioner filed a motion that the Court construed as one

seeking a stay of the petition while she exhausted an additional claim in the state courts. 

Thereafter, Petitioner filed an amended petition. This order directs Respondent to show

cause why the petition should not be granted. 

BACKGROUND

According to the petition, Petitioner was convicted by a jury in Santa Clara County

Superior Court of murder. On May 11, 2001, she was sentenced to twenty-five years to

Case 3:03-cv-01055-JSW Document 11 Filed 04/05/06 Page 1 of 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 2

life in state prison. The California Court of Appeal affirmed the judgment of conviction

in 2001, and the Supreme Court of California denied review in 2002. Petitioner

commenced this action on May 11, 2003 and filed a habeas petition in this action on May

29, 2003.

DISCUSSION

I 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 [s]he

is in custody in violation of the Constitution or laws or treaties of the United States.” 28

U.S.C. § 2254(a). 

It 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.” Id. § 2243. 

II Legal Claims

Petitioner raises the following claims, all of which she alleges were presented to

the state courts: (1) the evidence was insufficient to support her felony-murder conviction

based on the underlying crime of torture, in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment; 

(2) her Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment rights were violated by an erroneous jury

instruction defining the elements of torture; (3) ineffective assistance of counsel for failing

to subpoena crucial witnesses. As it does not appear from the face of the petition that

Petitioner is not entitled to relief, Respondent is directed to file an answer to the petition

or a dispositive motion, as appropriate. 

CONCLUSION 

For the foregoing reasons and for good cause shown,

1. The Clerk shall administratively reopen this case and serve by certified mail a

copy of this order and the petition, and all attachments thereto, on Respondent. The Clerk

also shall serve a copy of this order on Petitioner. 

Case 3:03-cv-01055-JSW Document 11 Filed 04/05/06 Page 2 of 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 3

2. Respondent shall file with the Court and serve on Petitioner, within sixty (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. Respondent shall 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 issues presented by the petition. 

3. If Petitioner wishes to respond to the answer, she shall do so by filing a traverse

with the Court and serving it on Respondent within thirty (30) days of her receipt of the

answer.

4. Respondent may file 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 shall file with the Court

and serve on Respondent an opposition or statement of non-opposition within thirty (30)

days of receipt of the motion, and Respondent shall file with the Court and serve on

Petitioner a reply within fifteen (15) days of receipt of any opposition.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: April 5, 2006

 JEFFREY S. WHITE

United States District Judge

Case 3:03-cv-01055-JSW Document 11 Filed 04/05/06 Page 3 of 3