Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-02454/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-02454-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
William L. Bird
Petitioner
Jill Brown
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

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

WILLIAM L. BIRD,

Petitioner,

 v.

JILL BROWN, Warden,

Respondent. /

No. C 05-02454 MJJ

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Petitioner William L. Bird (“Petitioner”) is currently serving a term of eight years at San

Quentin State Prison in San Quentin, California, based on a state court conviction for second degree

burglary and grand theft of personal property. Petitioner has filed a petition for a writ of habeas

corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254.

Petitioner challenged his conviction and sentence through to the California Supreme Court,

without success. Petitioner now seeks federal habeas corpus relief, claiming that the trial court’s

determination that Petitioner’s prior conviction was a “serious felony” subjecting him to a longer

sentence violated his Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment rights. Petitioner claims that the court made

a critical factual finding on an element of that prior crime that was never tried by a jury.

For the foregoing reasons and for good cause shown, it is hereby ordered that: 

1. Respondent shall file and serve within sixty (60) days of the issuance of this Order,

an answer conforming in all respects with Rule 5 of the Rules Governing Habeas Corpus Cases

Under Section 2254, showing cause why a writ of habeas corpus should not issue; and

Case 3:05-cv-02454-MJJ Document 3 Filed 06/29/05 Page 1 of 2
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

2

2. If Petitioner wishes to reply to the answer, he must do so by filing and serving a

traverse within thirty (30) days of his receipt of Respondent’s answer.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June__29_, 2005 /s/ 

MARTIN J. JENKINS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:05-cv-02454-MJJ Document 3 Filed 06/29/05 Page 2 of 2