Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_09-cv-02549/USCOURTS-caed-2_09-cv-02549-4/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)

---

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JEFFERY MARK COLE,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-09-2549 LKK DAD P

vs.

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF 

CALIFORNIA,

 

Respondents. ORDER

 /

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with an amended petition for writ

of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. In his amended petition, the sole federal habeas

claim submitted by petitioner is that his conviction was obtained in violation of his right against

self-incrimination. 

On January 26, 2010, respondent filed a motion to dismiss the petition on the

ground that petitioner failed to properly exhaust his sole federal habeas claim by first fairly

presenting it to the highest state court. Petitioner did not filed any opposition to the motion. 

Accordingly, on March 10, 2010, the court issued an order to show cause and directed petitioner

to file and serve an opposition to respondent’s motion within twenty-one days. In response to the

court’s order, petitioner filed a letter with the court explaining that he wished to proceed with this

action but was unaware that he could not raise “new grounds” in his petition. Petitioner

Case 2:09-cv-02549-LKK-TJB Document 25 Filed 04/29/10 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

2

requested an extension of time to file an amended petition containing claims for relief that he had

exhausted on direct appeal in state court. On April, 2, 2010, the court discharged its order to

show cause and instructed petitioner to either (1) file an opposition to respondent’s motion to

dismiss explaining when he presented his sole federal habeas claim to the California Supreme

Court, or (2) file a second amended petition that included claims that he previously exhausted on

direct appeal in state court.

Petitioner has since filed a second amended petition. In his second amended

petition, petitioner does not assert his claim regarding self-incrimination but rather asserts four

claims regarding the erroneous admission of evidence, the improper imposition of an aggravated

term and consecutive sentence, and a violation of his right to a fair trial. According to

petitioner’s form petition, it appears that he has exhausted each of these claims on direct appeal. 

Under these circumstances, the court will deny respondent’s motion to dismiss as

moot. In addition, since petitioner may be entitled to relief if the claimed violation of

constitutional rights is proved, the court will direct respondent to file a response to petitioner’s

second amended petition. 

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Respondent’s January 26, 2010 motion to dismiss (Doc. No. 16) is denied as

moot;

2. Respondent is directed to file a response to petitioner’s April 23, 2010 second

amended habeas petition within sixty days from the date of this order. See Rule 4, Fed. R.

Governing § 2254 Cases. An answer shall be accompanied by all transcripts and other

documents relevant to the issues presented in the petition. See Rule 5, Fed. R. Governing § 2254

Cases; 

3. If the response to the habeas petition is an answer, petitioner’s reply, if any,

shall be filed and served within thirty days after service of the answer; and

/////

Case 2:09-cv-02549-LKK-TJB Document 25 Filed 04/29/10 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

3

4. If the response to the habeas petition is a motion, petitioner’s opposition or

statement of non-opposition to the motion shall be filed and served within thirty days after

service of the motion, and respondent’s reply, if any, shall be filed and served within fourteen

days thereafter.

DATED: April 28, 2010.

DAD:9

cole2549.moot

Case 2:09-cv-02549-LKK-TJB Document 25 Filed 04/29/10 Page 3 of 3