United States District Court, C.D. California
Luis C. Sanchez
Present: The Honorable KENLY KIYA KATO, UNITED STATES
(In Chambers) Order to Show Cause Why This Action Should Not
Be Dismissed As Untimely
Luis C. Sanchez (“Petitioner”) has filed a
pro se Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
(“Petition”) by a Person in State Custody
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. However, the Petition
appears to be untimely on its face. The Court thus orders
Petitioner to show cause why this action should not be
dismissed as untimely.
STATE COURT PROCEEDINGS
August 31, 2010, in Los Angeles County Superior Court,
Petitioner was convicted of mayhem with a gang enhancement in
violation of sections 203 and 186.22(b)(1)(C) of the
California Penal Code. ECF Docket No. (“Dkt.”) 1,
Pet. at 2. Petitioner was sentenced to a term of fourteen
years. Id. Plaintiff did not appeal his conviction
or sentence. Id. at 2-3.
the conviction, Petitioner filed three state habeas
petitions. Id. at 4. The first state habeas petition
was filed in Los Angeles Superior Court and denied on August
19, 2016. Id.
September 26, 2016, Petitioner filed the second state habeas
petition in the California Court of Appeal. Pet. at 4. On
October 11, 2016, the California Court of Appeal denied the
petition. See California Courts, Appellate Courts
Case Information, Docket (Feb. 1, 2017, 4:24 PM)
November 7, 2016, Petitioner filed a third state habeas
petition in the California Supreme Court. See
California Courts, Appellate Courts Case Information, Docket
(Feb. 1, 2017, 4:24 PM)
no=S238254. On December 21, 2016, the California Supreme
Court denied the petition. Pet. at 5.
January 11, 2017, Petitioner constructively
filed the instant Petition alleging his sentence
is “subject to the requirements of the Determinate
Sentence Act, under which enhancements for determinant terms
are imposed at one-third of the enhancement term.”
Id. at 6.
THE PETITION WAS FILED AFTER AEDPA'S ONE-YEAR LIMITATIONS
filed the Petition after April 24, 1996, the effective date
of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act
(“AEDPA”). See Pet. at 9. Therefore, the
requirements for habeas relief set forth in AEDPA apply.
Soto v. Ryan, 760 F.3d 947, 956-57 (9th Cir. 2014).
AEDPA “sets a one-year limitations period in which a
state prisoner must file a federal habeas corpus
petition.” Thompson v. Lea, 681 F.3d 1093,
1093 (9th Cir. 2012) (citation omitted). Ordinarily, the
limitations period runs from the date on which the
prisoner's judgment of conviction “became final ...