From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Conner v. Lewis

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jan 4, 2012
No. C 11-4464 LHK (PR) (N.D. Cal. Jan. 4, 2012)

Opinion

No. C 11-4464 LHK (PR)

01-04-2012

SCOTT CONNER, Petitioner, v. WARDEN GREG LEWIS, Respondent.


ORDER TO RE-OPEN; GRANTING MOTION FOR LEAVE TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS; ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE


(Docket No. 9.)

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The Clerk is ordered to RE-OPEN this action. Petitioner's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is GRANTED. The Court orders Respondent to show cause why a writ of habeas corpus should not be granted.

DISCUSSION

A. Standard of Review

This Court may entertain a petition for 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); Rose v. Hodges, 423 U.S. 19, 21 (1975).

A district court 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." 28 U.S.C. § 2243. B. Petitioner's Claims

In 2009, plaintiff was validated as an associate of the Aryan Brotherhood prison gang, and placed into the Security Housing Unit. Plaintiff alleges that this decision violated the right to due process. Liberally construed, Plaintiff states a cognizable claim for relief.

CONCLUSION

1. The Clerk shall RE-OPEN this action.

2. The Clerk shall serve by mail a copy of this order and the petition (docket no. 1) and all attachments thereto upon the Respondent and the Respondent's attorney, the Attorney General of the State of California. The Clerk shall also serve a copy of this order on Petitioner.

3. Respondent shall file with the Court and serve on Petitioner, within ninety days of the date this order is filed, 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 underlying state criminal 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 days of the date the answer is filed.

4. 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 within ninety days of the date this order is filed. 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 days of the date the motion is filed, and Respondent shall file with the court and serve on Petitioner a reply within fifteen days of the date any opposition is filed.

5. It is Petitioner's responsibility to prosecute this case. 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 keep the court and all parties 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.

_____________

LUCY H. KOH

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Conner v. Lewis

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jan 4, 2012
No. C 11-4464 LHK (PR) (N.D. Cal. Jan. 4, 2012)
Case details for

Conner v. Lewis

Case Details

Full title:SCOTT CONNER, Petitioner, v. WARDEN GREG LEWIS, Respondent.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Jan 4, 2012

Citations

No. C 11-4464 LHK (PR) (N.D. Cal. Jan. 4, 2012)