Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_06-cv-06408/USCOURTS-cand-5_06-cv-06408-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)

---

United States District Court

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

Order to Show Cause

N:\Pro - Se\7.27.2007\06-06408 Gadsden06408_osc.wpd

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNUSSUN GADSDEN,

Petitioner,

 vs.

D.K. SISTO, Warden,

Respondent.

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C 06-06408 JW (PR)

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

(Docket Nos. 4 & 5)

Petitioner, a California state prisoner currently incarcerated at the Solano

State Prison, has filed a pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner has paid the filing fee. 

BACKGROUND

According to the petition, petitioner was convicted by a jury in Superior

Court for the State of California in and for the County of Santa Clara of kidnapping

for robbery, second degree robbery, carjacking, making criminal threats, and

criminal flight. Petitioner was sentenced to a term of seven years to life in state

prison. The California Court of Appeal affirmed, and the Supreme Court of

California denied a petition for review. Thereafter, petitioner filed unsuccessful

habeas petitions in all three levels of the California courts. 

Case 5:06-cv-06408-JW Document 8 Filed 07/27/07 Page 1 of 3
United States District Court

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

Order to Show Cause

N:\Pro - Se\7.27.2007\06-06408 Gadsden06408_osc.wpd 2

DISCUSSION

A. 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. 

B. Legal Claims

Petitioner raises four claims: 1) the exclusion of impeachment evidence

violated his rights under the Confrontation Clause; 2) he received ineffective

assistance of appellate counsel, in violation of his right to due process; 3) the

prosecutor committed misconduct, in violation of petitioner’s right to due process;

and 4) there was insufficient evidence to support the kidnapping for robbery

conviction, in violation of petitioner’s right to due process. Liberally construed,

petitioner’s claims appear cognizable under § 2254 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

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

Case 5:06-cv-06408-JW Document 8 Filed 07/27/07 Page 2 of 3
United States District Court

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

Order to Show Cause

N:\Pro - Se\7.27.2007\06-06408 Gadsden06408_osc.wpd 3

Rule 5 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, showing cause why a writ of

habeas corpus should not be issued. 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 thirty (30) days of his

receipt of the answer. 

3. Respondent may, within sixty (60) days of the issuance of this order,

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. Petitioner is reminded that all communications with the court must be

served on respondent by mailing a true copy of the document to respondent’s

counsel. Petitioner must keep the court and all parties 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).

DATED: July 19, 2007 

JAMES WARE

United States District Judge 

Case 5:06-cv-06408-JW Document 8 Filed 07/27/07 Page 3 of 3