Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-05461/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-05461-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
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

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

BRYAN C. VACA, 

Petitioner,

 vs.

JOHN MARSHALL, Warden,

Respondent.

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C 06-5461 JSW (PR)

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

INTRODUCTION

Petitioner, a prisoner of the State of California, currently incarcerated at the

California Men’s Colony in San Luis Obispo, California, has filed a habeas corpus

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

conviction. Petitioner has paid the filing fee. This order directs Respondent to show

cause why the petition should not be granted.

BACKGROUND

According to the petition, Petitioner was convicted after trial of second degree

murder and attempted murder in Santa Clara County Superior Court and sentenced to a

term of 24 years-to-life in state prison. Petitioner appealed his conviction to the

California Court of Appeal in 1998. The Supreme Court of California denied Petitioner’s

petition for review in 2000. Petitioner filed collateral challenges in the state courts

between 2002 and 2005. Petitioner filed the instant federal habeas petition on September

6, 2006. 

Case 3:06-cv-05461-JSW Document 2 Filed 02/13/07 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

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 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

The petition alleges that Petitioner suffered ineffective assistance of counsel under

the Sixth Amendment based on trial counsel’s failure to request an instruction or produce

expert testimony on the partial defense of imperfect self-defense and his failure to provide

the sanity phase expert witnesses with the audiotape of Petitioner’s police interview. 

Liberally construed, it does not appear from the face of the petition that Petitioner is not

entitled to relief. Accordingly, Respondent is ordered to respond to the petition as set

forth below.

CONCLUSION 

For the foregoing reasons and for good cause shown,

1. The Clerk shall serve by certified mail a copy of this order and the petition, and

all attachments thereto, on Respondent and Respondent's attorney, the Attorney General

of the State of California. The Clerk also shall serve a copy of this order on Petitioner. 

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

Case 3:06-cv-05461-JSW Document 2 Filed 02/13/07 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

to a determination of the issues presented by the petition. If Petitioner wishes to respond

to the answer, he shall do so by filing a traverse with the Court and serving it on

Respondent within thirty (30) days of his receipt of the answer.

3. 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.

4. It is Petitioner’s responsibility to prosecute this case. Petitioner must keep 

the Court informed of any change of address by filing a separate paper captioned “Notice

of Change of Address.” He must comply with the Court’s orders in a timely fashion. 

Failure to do so may result in the dismissal of this action for failure to prosecute pursuant

to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b)

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: JEFFREY S. WHITE

United States District Judge

2/13/2007

Case 3:06-cv-05461-JSW Document 2 Filed 02/13/07 Page 3 of 3