Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_07-cv-00296/USCOURTS-azd-2_07-cv-00296-0/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)

---

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

 1 “Doc.#” refers to the docket number of documents filed in this action.

TERMPSREF

WO SC

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Leonard Guzman, 

Petitioner, 

vs.

Dora Schriro, et al.,

Respondents. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 07-0296-PHX-SMM (JRI)

ORDER

Petitioner Leonard Guzman, who is confined in the Arizona State Prison Complex,

Eyman-SMUI, in Florence, Arizona, has filed a pro se Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. (Doc.# 1.)1

 He has paid the $5.00 filing fee. The Court will

require an answer to the Petition. 

I. Petition

Petitioner pleaded guilty to sexual assault with a prior felony conviction in Maricopa

County Superior Court, CR 1999-091712, and was sentenced to 10.5 years imprisonment on

Case 2:07-cv-00296-SMM-JRI Document 3 Filed 02/23/07 Page 1 of 4
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 Petitioner also pleaded guilty to attempted conspiracy to commit first degree murder

with one prior felony conviction in a companion case, CR 99-094153, for which he was

sentenced to 9.25 years to run consecutive to his sentence for the conviction at issue in this

action.

 3

 The court consolidated Petitioner’s state post-conviction proceedings in CR 1999-

091712 and CR 1999-094153 pursuant to Petitioner’s request. (Doc.# 1 at 7.)

TERMPSREF - 2 -

June 15, 2000.2 (Doc.# 1 at 1.) The Superior Court denied Petitioner’s petition for postconviction relief on May 21, 2003.3

 (Id. at 2.) The Arizona Court of Appeals and the

Arizona Supreme Court, respectively, denied petitions for review on June 17, 2005, No. 1

CA-CR 04-0136 PRPC, and February 13, 2006, CR-05-0396-PR. (Id.) 

Petitioner names Arizona Department of Corrections Director Dora Schriro and

Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard as Respondents. Petitioner raises four grounds for

relief. First, he contends that his plea was unlawfully induced and was not voluntarily and

knowingly made. Second, he alleges that he was indicted by an improperly constituted grand

jury. Third, he alleges he received ineffective assistance of counsel based on his attorney’s

failure to move to suppress a confession and to make objections at a hearing. Lastly, he

alleges that sentencing enhancement based on his prior conviction violated his double

jeopardy rights.

It is unclear whether Petitioner has exhausted his claims. Even assuming that the

exhaustion requirement has not been met, it appears that any unexhausted claim may be

procedurally barred. In light of the possibility of procedural bar, a summary dismissal would

be inappropriate. See Castille v. Peoples, 489 U.S. 346, 351-52 (1989) (remanding where

petitioner failed to exhaust claims and it was not clear whether the claims were procedurally

barred). Accordingly, an answer is required. 28 U.S.C. § 2254(a). 

II. Warnings

A. Address Changes

Petitioner must file and serve a notice of a change of address in accordance with Rule

83.3(d) of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure. Petitioner must not include a motion for other

Case 2:07-cv-00296-SMM-JRI Document 3 Filed 02/23/07 Page 2 of 4
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

TERMPSREF - 3 -

relief with a notice of change of address. Failure to comply may result in dismissal of this

action.

B. Copies

Petitioner must serve Respondents, or counsel if an appearance has been entered, a

copy of every document that he files. Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(a). Each filing must include a

certificate stating that a copy of the filing was served. Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(d). Also, Petitioner

must submit an additional copy of every filing for use by the Court. LRCiv 5.4. Failure to

comply may result in the filing being stricken without further notice to Petitioner.

C. Possible Dismissal

If Petitioner fails to timely comply with every provision of this Order, including these

warnings, the Court may dismiss this action without further notice. See Ferdik v. Bonzelet,

963 F.2d 1258, 1260-61 (9th Cir. 1992) (a district court may dismiss an action for failure to

comply with any order of the Court).

IT IS ORDERED:

(1) The Clerk of Court must serve a copy of the Petition (doc.# 1) and this Order on

the Respondent and the Attorney General of the State of Arizona by certified mail pursuant

to Rule 4, Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases. 

(2) Respondents must answer the Petition within 40 days of the date of service.

Respondents must not file a dispositive motion in place of an answer but may file an answer

limited to relevant affirmative defenses, including but not limited to, statute of limitations,

procedural bar, or non-retroactivity. If the answer is limited to affirmative defenses, only

those portions of the record relevant to those defenses need be attached to the answer.

Failure to set forth an affirmative defense in an answer may be treated as a waiver of the

defense. Day v. McDonough, 126 S. Ct. 1675, 1684 (2006). If not limited to affirmative

defenses, the answer must fully comply with all of the requirements of Rule 5 of the Rules

Governing Section 2254 Cases.

(3) Petitioner may file a reply within 30 days from the date of service of the answer.

Case 2:07-cv-00296-SMM-JRI Document 3 Filed 02/23/07 Page 3 of 4
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

TERMPSREF - 4 -

(4) This matter is referred to Magistrate Judge Jay R. Irwin pursuant to Rules 72.1

and 72.2 of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure for further proceedings and a report and

recommendation.

DATED this 22nd day of February, 2007.

Case 2:07-cv-00296-SMM-JRI Document 3 Filed 02/23/07 Page 4 of 4