Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_20-cv-01752/USCOURTS-cand-5_20-cv-01752-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:1651 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus

---

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JERIT DEVON AARON,

Plaintiff,

v.

JOSIE GASTELO,

Defendant.

Case No. 20-cv-01752-JSC 

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Re: Dkt. No. 1

Petitioner, a prisoner of the State of California, filed a habeas corpus petition pursuant to 28 

U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner has paid the $5.00 filing fee. His petition sets forth 3 claims challenging 

the constitutionality of Petitioner’s conviction in state court: (1) that he was denied his Fourteenth 

Amendment right to Due Process because there was insufficient evidence to support the convictions 

for first degree burglary, attempted first degree burglary, and dissuading a witness; (2) that he was 

denied his Fourteenth Amendment right to Due Process by the consolidation of his two cases where 

the evidence was not cross-admissible and the effect of the joinder was to make the evidence in each 

case appear stronger; and (3) that the cumulative effect of multiple constitutional errors denied 

Petitioner his Fourteenth Amendment right to Due Process.

These claims, when liberally construed, are cognizable and potentially meritorious. Good 

cause appearing, Respondent is hereby ordered to show cause why the petition should not be 

granted.

In order to expedite the resolution of this case, it is further ordered as follows:

1. The Clerk shall serve Respondent and the Respondent’s attorney, the Attorney General 

of the State of California, with a copy of this order and the petition with all attachments. 

2. Consistent with Habeas Local Rule 2254-6, Respondent shall file with the court and 

Case 5:20-cv-01752-BLF Document 3 Filed 03/16/20 Page 1 of 2
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

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

serve on Petitioner, within 60 days of service of the petition and 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 based on the claims found cognizable herein. 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. 

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 30 days of the date the answer is filed.

3. Respondent may file, within 60 days, 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 30 days of the date the 

motion is filed, and Respondent shall file with the court and serve on Petitioner a reply within 14 

days of the date any opposition is filed.

4. The Clerk shall send a notice to Petitioner and Respondent regarding consenting to the 

jurisdiction of a magistrate judge.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 16, 2020

________________________

JACQUELINE SCOTT CORLEY

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 5:20-cv-01752-BLF Document 3 Filed 03/16/20 Page 2 of 2