Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Dunn v. Pliler

July 20, 2005

GLENN ALLEN DUNN, PETITIONER,
v.
CHERYL K. PLILER, WARDEN, RESPONDENT.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Claudia Wilken United States District Judge

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE, GRANTING IN FORMA PAUPERIS STATUS AND DENYING MOTION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE (Docket nos. 2, 5)

INTRODUCTION

Petitioner Glen Allen Dunn, a State prisoner incarcerated at the California State Prison-Sacramento, has filed a pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 and an application for in forma pauperis status. Venue is proper because Petitioner was convicted in Contra Costa County, which is located in this judicial district. See 28 U.S.C. § 2241(d).

BACKGROUND

According to the allegations in the petition and the documents attached thereto, on August 2, 1995, an information was filed in Contra Costa County Superior Court charging Petitioner with three counts of bank robbery and with sentence enhancement allegations of two prior felony convictions and two prior prison terms. At a court trial held on November 17, 1995, Petitioner was found mentally incompetent to stand trial and was committed to Atascadero State Hospital, to remain hospitalized until restored to the mental capacity to stand trial. Criminal proceedings were reinstated on May 21, 1996. On June 27, 1996, Petitioner entered the additional plea of not guilty by reason of insanity.

On November 21, 1996, a jury found Petitioner guilty of all charges. On the following day at the conclusion of the insanity phase of the trial the jury found that Petitioner was legally sane at the time of the charged crimes. On March 3, 1997, the trial court denied Petitioner's motion for a new trial and sentenced him to eighty-seven years to life in State prison.

Petitioner appealed his conviction to the California Court of Appeal, which affirmed the judgment of conviction on March 30, 1999. A petition for review was filed in the California Supreme Court and denied on April 13, 1999. Petitioner filed a State petition for a writ of habeas corpus in the State superior court, which was denied in a reasoned opinion issued on May 20, 2003. A State habeas petition filed in the California Supreme Court was denied on December 12, 2003, without citation or comment, and another State habeas petition filed in the California Supreme Court was denied on November 17, 2004, with a summary citation to In re Robbins, 18 Cal. 4th 770, 780 (1998).

The present federal habeas corpus petition was filed on December 28, 2004. Petitioner alleges that he has exhausted his State remedies with respect to all claims raised in this petition.

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); 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.

As it does not appear from the face of the petition that Petitioner is not entitled to relief, Respondent shall SHOW CAUSE why the petition should not be granted.

CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons and for good cause shown,

1. Leave to proceed in forma pauperis is GRANTED. ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.