Frauenheim

(HC) Harris v. Frauenheim

Caution
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaOctober 4, 20191:19-cv-01203California917 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GERALD BRENT HARRIS, Case No. 1:19-cv-01203-LJO-SAB-HC

Petitioner, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

v.

SCOTT FRAUENHEIM,

Respondent.

16 Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases requires preliminary review of a habeas petition and allows a district court to dismiss a petition before the respondent is ordered to file a response, if it “plainly appears from the petition and any attached exhibits that the petitioner is not entitled to relief in the district court.” A petitioner in state custody who is proceeding with a petition for writ of habeas corpus must exhaust state judicial remedies. 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b)(1). The exhaustion doctrine is based on comity to the state court and gives the state court the initial opportunity to correct the state’s alleged constitutional deprivations. Coleman v. Thompson, 501 U.S. 722, 731 (1991); Rose v. Lundy, 455 U.S. …

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.