Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_08-cv-01724/USCOURTS-cand-3_08-cv-01724-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Alejandro F. Michel
Petitioner
J. Walker
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

ALEJANDRO F. MICHEL, 

Petitioner,

 vs.

J. WALKER, Warden,

Respondent.

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C 08-1724 JSW (PR)

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

(Docket No. 2)

INTRODUCTION

Petitioner, a prisoner of the State of California, has filed a habeas corpus petition

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging his state court conviction. Petitioner has paid

the filing fee. His motion to file the instant petition is GRANTED (docket no. 2). This

order directs Respondent to show cause why the petition should not be granted.

BACKGROUND

According to the petition, Petitioner pled guilty in 2003 to multiple counts of

robbery and attempted robbery, as well as to a firearm enhancement, in Marin County

Superior Court. Based on this guilty plea, the trial court sentenced him to a term of 12

years and four months in state prison. He filed habeas petitions in the superior, appellate

and supreme courts, all of which were denied. Thereafter, he filed the instant federal

petition. 

Case 3:08-cv-01724-JSW Document 3 Filed 05/13/08 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

1

Petitioner also asserts that the trial court erred in denying his habeas petition in which he

made this same argument. The Court does not view this assertion as a separate claim.

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 claims that his sentence violated his right to a jury trial because the trial

court imposed an upper term based on facts that were neither found by a jury nor

admitted by petitioner.1

 Liberally construed, this claim is sufficient to warrant a response

from Respondent.

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

Case 3:08-cv-01724-JSW Document 3 Filed 05/13/08 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 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 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).

This order terminates Docket No. 2.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: May 13, 2008 JEFFREY S. WHITE

United States District Judge

Case 3:08-cv-01724-JSW Document 3 Filed 05/13/08 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

ALEJANDRO F. MICHEL,

Plaintiff,

 v.

WILLIAM T. SULLIVAN et al,

Defendant. /

Case Number: CV08-01724 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 May 13, 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.

Alejandro F. Michel

T86169

CSP-Sacramento

P.O. Box 290066

Represa, CA 95671

Dated: May 13, 2008

Richard W. Wieking, Clerk

By: Jennifer Ottolini, Deputy Clerk

Case 3:08-cv-01724-JSW Document 3 Filed 05/13/08 Page 4 of 4