Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-04857/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-04857-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Frederick W. Everts
Petitioner
James Yates
Respondent

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

FREDERICK WILLIAM EVERTS, 

Petitioner,

 vs.

JAMES YATES, Warden,

Respondent.

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C 09-4857 JSW (PR)

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

INTRODUCTION

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

Valley State Prison in Coalinga, California, has filed a habeas corpus petition pursuant to

28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging the constitutionality 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 multiple sex offenses in

Santa Clara County Superior Court, and, in 2007, the trial court sentenced him to a term

of 800 years in state prison. Petitioner’s appeal to the California Court of Appeal and his

petition for review in the California Supreme Court were denied in 2007 and 2008

respectively. Petitioner subsequently sought collateral relief in the state courts. Petitioner

filed the instant federal habeas petition in this Court on October 13, 2009. 

Case 3:09-cv-04857-JSW Document 4 Filed 04/27/10 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

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

Petitioner raises the following federal ground for relief in the petition: Penal Code

§ 25(b) violates due process by unconstitutionally shifting the burden of proof on the

element of intent. Liberally construed, it does not appear from the face of the petition that

Petitioner is not entitled to relief on the other claims set forth above. 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

to the answer, he shall do so by filing a traverse with the Court and serving it on

Case 3:09-cv-04857-JSW Document 4 Filed 04/27/10 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

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: April 27, 2010 JEFFREY S. WHITE

United States District Judge

Case 3:09-cv-04857-JSW Document 4 Filed 04/27/10 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

FREDERICK WILLIAM EVERTS,

Plaintiff,

 v.

JANES YATES et al,

Defendant. /

Case Number: CV09-04857 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 April 27, 2010, 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.

Frederick W. Everts

F62994

Pleasant Valley State Prison

P.O. Box 8504

Coalinga, CA 93210

Dated: April 27, 2010

Richard W. Wieking, Clerk

By: Jennifer Ottolini, Deputy Clerk

Case 3:09-cv-04857-JSW Document 4 Filed 04/27/10 Page 4 of 4