Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00462/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00462-6/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Vincent Harris
Petitioner
Kathy Mendoza-Powers
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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

VINCENT HARRIS,

Petitioner, No. CIV 06-00462 ALA HC

vs.

KATHY MENDOZA-POWERS, et al.,

Respondent. ORDER

____________________________/

Vincent Harris, a prisoner currently in custody in Avenal State Prison, has filed a petition

for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Therein, he asserts that his due

process rights were violated when California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger reversed the

Board of Prison Terms’ determination that he was suitable for parole. On June 22, 2007, the

Court issued an order directing Respondent to file an answer to Mr. Harris’ petition within sixty

days of the date of service of the order, and stating that Mr. Harris “may file a traverse within

thirty (30) days form the date Respondent files her answer.” Docket No. 14, at 2. 

On August 21, 2007, Respondent filed an Answer to Mr. Harris’ petition. Therein,

Case 1:06-cv-00462-OWW -DLB Document 17 Filed 08/24/07 Page 1 of 2
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

Respondent asserts that the petition should be dismissed because the state court decision denying

Mr. Harris’ state petition for a writ of habeas corpus was not contrary to, or an unreasonable

application of, federal law as established by the Supreme Court. Specifically, Respondent

contends that Mr. Harris received “all the process to which he was entitled” when he was

provided an opportunity to be heard and a written copy of the Governor’s decision. Answer at 5-

6. Before the Court rules on the merits of Mr. Harris’ petition, it must give Mr. Harris notice

and an opportunity to present his arguments on the issues raised in Respondent’s Answer.

For the foregoing reasons, Mr. Harris IS HEREBY ORDERED to file a Traverse

responding to the arguments set forth in Respondent’s Answer, on or before Friday, September

21, 2007. 

DATED: August 23, 2007

/s/ Arthur L. Alarcón 

 UNITED STATES CIRCUIT JUDGE

Sitting by Designation

Case 1:06-cv-00462-OWW -DLB Document 17 Filed 08/24/07 Page 2 of 2