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.

Joachim v. Hatton

United States District Court, N.D. California

November 2, 2017

DUANE SCOTT JOACHIM, Petitioner,
v.
S. HATTON, Respondent.

          ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS, DENYING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY

          HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         Before the Court is the above-titled pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus, filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 by petitioner Duane Scott Joachim, challenging the validity of a judgment obtained against him in state court. Respondent has filed an answer to the petition, Dkt. No. 11, and Petitioner has filed a traverse, Dkt. No. 14. For the reasons set forth below, the petition is DENIED.

         I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY

         On September 30, 2013, a Contra Costa County found Petitioner guilty of first-degree residential burglary and first-degree residential robbery, in violation of sections 459, 460(a), 211, 212.5(a) of the California Penal Code. Clerk's Transcript (“CT”) at 76-77.[1] The trial court sentenced Petitioner to a total term of seven years, eight months in state prison. CT at 196-97.

         On August 7, 2014, Petitioner filed a direct appeal with the California Court of Appeal, raising a sentencing claim. Answer, Exhs. B-D. On June 4, 2015, the California Court of Appeal remanded the matter to the trial court to impose and stay the term on the burglary conviction and to correct a clerical error on the abstract of judgment, but otherwise affirmed the judgment. Answer, Exh. E.

         On August 8, 2015, Petitioner filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus with the California Court of Appeal. Answer, Ex. F. On August 13, 2015, the California Court of Appeal summarily denied the petition. Answer, Ex. F, and Dkt. No. 11-4 at 102.

         On September 3, 2015, Petitioner filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus with the California Supreme Court, raising a speedy trial claim. Answer, Ex. G. On November 24, 2015, the California Supreme Court summarily denied the petition. Answer, Ex. H.

         On February 23, 2016, Petitioner filed the instant petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, alleging that his right to a speedy trial was violated with respect to his conviction in Contra Costa County Superior Court for first-degree residential burglary and first-degree residential robbery. Dkt. No. 1 (“Pet.”).

         II. STATEMENT OF FACTS

         The facts underlying Petitioner's first-degree residential burglary and first-degree residential robbery convictions are omitted as they are not relevant to the speedy trial claim raised in his petition.

         On February 17, 2011, the Contra Costa County District Attorney filed a complaint charging Petitioner with first-degree residential burglary and first-degree residential robbery. Pet. at 5.[2] That same day, Petitioner appeared for an arraignment on this complaint and pled not guilty. Id. at 6. On March 11, 2011, a preliminary hearing was held. Id. On March 22, 2011, an amended felony complaint was filed, and Petitioner again pled not guilty. Id. On April 7, 2011, Petitioner posted bail. Id.

         On June 3, 2011, while Petitioner was out on bail from Contra Costa County, Petitioner was arrested in Napa County, where he was charged with receiving stolen property. Pet. at 6. On April 19, 2012, Petitioner was convicted of the charge and sentenced to four years in Napa County Jail. Id.; CT at 246.

         On April 24, 2012, Petitioner filed a demand for a speedy trial with the Contra Costa County District Attorney. Pet. at 6 and 20.

         On May 11, 2012, the Sonoma County District Attorney filed a complaint charging Petitioner with residential burglary. Dkt. No. 11-5 at 7-9. On May 21, 2012, Petitioner was transferred from the custody of Napa County to Sonoma County pursuant to a removal order issued by the Sonoma County Superior Court. Pet. at 8; CT at 183; Dkt. No. 11-5 at 10-11. Pre-trial proceedings in the Sonoma County case were held in early June 2012. CT at 183-84; Dkt. No. 11-5 at 12-15. On June 5, 2012, Petitioner filed a motion to continue his trial in Sonoma County Superior Court. Dkt. No. 11-5 at 46-47. Petitioner pled not guilty in the Sonoma County case; bail was set in the Sonoma County case; and a preliminary examination was set for July 24, 2012 for the Sonoma County case. CT at 183-84; Dkt. No. 11-5 at 12-15.

         On July 9, 2012, Petitioner appeared in Contra Costa County Superior Court on the charges underlying this petition. Pet. at 6. Trial was set for August 20, 2012, and time was not waived. Id. Because he was being held in Contra Costa County for these proceedings, Petitioner missed his July 19, 2012 readiness conference in his Sonoma County case. Id.

         On July 19, 2012, Sonoma County Superior Court was informed that Petitioner was in custody in Contra Costa County, not Napa County. CT at 184; Dkt. No. 11-5 at 15. Contra Costa County released Petitioner to Sonoma County in time for his July 24, 2012 preliminary examination. Pet. at 6; Dkt. No. 11-5 at 15. Because Petitioner was in the custody of Sonoma County, Petitioner then missed his August 8, 2012 readiness conference in Contra Costa County. Pet. at 6 and 9. Over the next several months, Petitioner waived time and requested an extension of time in his Sonoma County case. Dkt. No. 11-5 at 48-62.

         On March 21, 2013, Petitioner pled guilty to second-degree residential burglary in Sonoma County Superior Court, and was sentenced to four ...


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.