Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-04981/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-04981-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Ken Clark
Respondent
Brian A. Misquez
Petitioner

Document Text:

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

BRIAN ALAN MISQUEZ, 

Petitioner,

 vs.

KEN CLARK, Warden,

Respondent.

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C 07-4981 JSW (PR)

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

INTRODUCTION

Petitioner, a prisoner of the State of California, currently incarcerated at California

Substance Abuse Treatment Facility in Corcoran, California, filed a habeas corpus petition

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging the constitutional validity of his state conviction. 

Petitioner has paid the filing fee. This order directs Respondent to show cause why the

petition should not be granted.

BACKGROUND

According to the petition, Petitioner was convicted of murder after a jury trial in 

Contra Clara County Superior Court in 2004. Petitioner appealed his conviction to

California Court of Appeal. Petitioner also filed a petition for review in the Supreme

Court of California. According to the petition, the Supreme Court denied his petition in

Case 3:07-cv-04981-JSW Document 2 Filed 01/30/08 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

2006. The instant federal habeas petition was filed on September 26, 2007. 

DISCUSSION

I 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. 

II Legal Claims

The petition raises the following ground for relief: the trial court’s failure to

remove a juror for cause violated Petitioner’s rights to due process and trial by jury. 

Liberally construed, it does not appear from the face of the petition that Petitioner is not

entitled to relief on his claims. Accordingly, Respondent is ordered to respond to the

petition as set forth below.

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 Rule 5 of the

Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, showing cause why a writ of habeas corpus should

not be granted. 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

Case 3:07-cv-04981-JSW Document 2 Filed 01/30/08 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 3

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 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. It is Petitioner’s responsibility to prosecute this case. Petitioner must keep 

the Court 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)

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: January 30, 2008 JEFFREY S. WHITE

United States District Judge

Case 3:07-cv-04981-JSW Document 2 Filed 01/30/08 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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

BRIAN ALAN MISQUEZ,

Plaintiff,

 v.

KEN CLARK et al,

Defendant. /

Case Number: CV07-04981 JSW 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S. District

Court, Northern District of California.

That on January 30, 2008, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the attached, by placing

said copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter listed, by

depositing said envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into an inter-office

delivery receptacle located in the Clerk's office.

Brian A. Misquez

V57216

CSATF

P.O.Box 5246

Corcoran, CA 93212

Dated: January 30, 2008

Richard W. Wieking, Clerk

By: Jennifer Ottolini, Deputy Clerk

Case 3:07-cv-04981-JSW Document 2 Filed 01/30/08 Page 4 of 4