Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_98-cv-00711/USCOURTS-caed-2_98-cv-00711-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 535
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus - Death Penalty
Cause of Action: 28:2254 Ptn for Writ of H/C - Stay of Execution

---

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

 Petitioner, represented by counsel, also filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus which was

granted as to the imposition of the death penalty. Grant v. Ornoski, CIV S-90-0779 DFL JFM

(E.D. Cal. filed January 12, 2006). 

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RICHARD GRANT,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-98-0711 DFL JFM

vs. DEATH PENALTY CASE

STEVEN W. ORNOSKI, Acting Warden 

of California State Prison at San Quentin,

et al., 

Respondents. ORDER

 /

Petitioner, a state prisoner under sentence of death, filed a pro se petition for writ

of habeas corpus. Mr. Grant does not make any credible allegations that his continued 1

confinement violates the federal constitution, a prerequisite for federal habeas corpus relief. See

Estelle v. McGuire, 502 U.S. 62, 67-68 (1991). Nor does he allege he has exhausted state

remedies by presenting any claim of constitutional error to the state’s highest court, another

prerequisite for federal habeas corpus relief. Picard v. Connor, 404 U.S. 270, 276 (1971).

Case 2:98-cv-00711-DFL -JFM Document 32 Filed 01/23/06 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

Accordingly, it is appropriate to dismiss this action without issuing an order to show cause. 28

U.S.C. § 2243; Harris v. Nelson, 394 U.S. 286, 298-99 (1969).

For the foregoing reasons, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows:

1. Petitioner’s April 21, 1998 petition for writ of habeas corpus in the aboveentitled action is dismissed.

2. Petitioner’s request to proceed in forma pauperis in this action is granted.

3. Petitioner’s requests for appointment of counsel, substitution of counsel in 

habeas action CIV-S-90-779, investigations, discovery, expert assistance,

a protective order, and a hearing are denied. 

DATED: 1/20/2006

DAVID F. LEVI

United States District Judge

Case 2:98-cv-00711-DFL -JFM Document 32 Filed 01/23/06 Page 2 of 2