Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-04019/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-04019-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Melton Lee Myers
Petitioner
R. L. Subia
Respondent

Document Text:

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

P:\PRO-SE\SJ.JW\HC.09\Myers04019_osc.wpd

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MELTON LEE MYERS,

Petitioner,

 vs.

R. L. SUBIA, Warden, 

Respondent.

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C 09-04019 JW (PR)

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Petitioner, a state prisoner incarcerated at the Mule Creek State Prison in

Ione, California, has filed a pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28

U.S.C. § 2254 challenging his state conviction

BACKGROUND

According to the petition, petitioner was found guilty in the Superior Court of

the State of California in and for the County of Monterey of three counts of

committing a lewd act upon a child under the age of 14, one count of penetration

with a foreign object of a child under the age of 14, and one count of distributing

obscene materia. (See In re Melton L. Myers, No. HC5881, slip op. 1 (Oct. 17,

2007).) Petitioner was sentenced in 1997, to 75 years to life in state prison. (Id.) 

Case 3:09-cv-04019-RS Document 2 Filed 01/15/10 Page 1 of 4
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

P:\PRO-SE\SJ.JW\HC.09\Myers04019_osc.wpd 2

Petitioner filed habeas petitions in the state courts, with the California

Supreme Court denying review on February 25, 2009. (Id. at 5.) Petitioner filed the

instant federal habeas petition on August 28, 2009.

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 the following grounds for federal habeas relief: 1) the trial

court imposed an unauthorized sentence in violation of due process; and 2) the trial

court imposed restitution without a hearing to determine Petitioner’s ability to pay

violated due process. (Pet. 6.) Liberally construed, these claims are sufficient to

require a response. Respondent must show cause the writ should not be granted with

respect to the remaining claims.

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

Case 3:09-cv-04019-RS Document 2 Filed 01/15/10 Page 2 of 4
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

P:\PRO-SE\SJ.JW\HC.09\Myers04019_osc.wpd 3

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 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 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 nonopposition 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 also keep the court and all parties informed of any change 

of address. 

DATED: 

JAMES WARE

United States District Judge 

January 5, 2010 

Case 3:09-cv-04019-RS Document 2 Filed 01/15/10 Page 3 of 4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MELTON LEE MYERS,

Petitioner,

 v.

R.L. SUBIA, Warden,

Respondent. /

Case Number: CV09-04019 JW 

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 , 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.

Melton Lee Myers K-37870

Mule Creek State Prison

P. O. Box 409000

Ione, Ca 95640

Dated: 

Richard W. Wieking, Clerk

By: Elizabeth Garcia, Deputy Clerk

1/15/2010 1/15/2010 /s/

Case 3:09-cv-04019-RS Document 2 Filed 01/15/10 Page 4 of 4