Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-03761/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-03761-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 510
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Vacate Sentence
Cause of Action: 28:2255 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)

---

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

BENJAMIN KERENSA,

Movant,

 v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Respondent.

 /

No. C 05-3761 JSW

(Re: CR-03-333)

ORDER TO SHOW CASE

Movant Benjamin Kerensa is currently serving a sentence imposed by this Court

following the entry of a guilty plea to one count of wilfully making threatening communications

in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 844(e). Before the Court is Mr. Kerensa’s motion for an order under

28 U.S.C. § 2255 to vacate, set aside or correct his sentence. Under § 2255:

A prisoner in custody under sentence of a court established by Act of Congress

claiming the right to be released upon the ground that the sentence was imposed

in violation of the Constitution or laws of the United States, or that the court was

without jurisdiction to impose such sentence, or that the sentence was in excess

of the maximum authorized by law, or is otherwise subject to collateral attack,

may move the court which imposed the sentence to vacate, set aside or correct

the sentence. Unless the motion and the files and records of the case

conclusively show that the prisoner is entitled to no relief, the court shall cause

notice thereof to be served upon the United States attorney, grant a prompt

hearing thereon, determine the issues and make findings of fact and conclusions

of law with respect thereto. 

 Thus, a hearing is required “whenever the record does not affirmatively manifest the

factual or legal invalidity of the [movant’s] claims.” Baumann v. United States, 692 F.2d 565,

571 (9th Cir. 1982) (citation omitted). “A hearing must be granted unless the movant’s

allegations, when viewed against the record, do not state a claim for relief or are so palpably

Case 3:05-cv-03761-JSW Document 2 Filed 10/26/05 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

incredible or patently frivolous as to warrant summary dismissal.” United States v.

Schaflander, 743 F.2d 714, 717 (9th Cir. 1984) (citations omitted). 

Here, Mr. Kerensa essentially asserts two claims for relief. First, he claims that he was

deprived of his Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel based on trial

counsel’s failure to move to dismiss the indictment. Second, he raises issues with respect to his

mental competency, specifically that he did not receive a pretrial competency evaluation to

evaluate his ability to make decisions related directly to his case and that there was no

assessment into his ability to make decisions while under the influence of medications as

directed by Pretrial Services. 

Liberally construed, these claims appears colorable under 28 U.S.C. §2255 and merit an

answer from respondent. 

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 motion and all

attachments thereto upon the Office of the United States Attorney. The clerk shall also serve a

copy of this order on Movant.

2. Respondent shall file with the court and serve on Movant, within 30 days of the

date of this order, an answer conforming in all respects to Rule 5 of the Rules Governing

Section 2255 Proceedings, showing cause why the Court should not “ vacate, set aside or

correct the sentence” being served by Movant. 

3. If Movant wishes to respond to the answer, he shall do so by filing a reply with

the court and serving it on Respondent within 30 days of his receipt of the answer.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 26, 2005 

JEFFREY S. WHITE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:05-cv-03761-JSW Document 2 Filed 10/26/05 Page 2 of 2