Ryan James Johnson v. B. Cates

I.

INTRODUCTION

On March 17, 2021, Petitioner Ryan James Johnson (“Johnson”), an inmate at California Correctional Institution in Tehachapi, California, constructively filed1 a pro se Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (“Petition”) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (“Section 2254”). ECF Docket No. (“Dkt.”) 1. Johnson sets forth one ground for habeas relief: “[Johnson’s] 14th Amendment right to the equal protection of law was violated under Rinaldi v. Yeager[,] 384 U.S. 305, when the legislature neglected to include the reform of vicarious accomplice liability for provocative act murder within the resentencing provisions of penal code section 1170.95(a)(1).” Id. at 4, 20. As discussed below, the Court orders Johnson to show cause why the Petition should not be dismissed for failure to state a cognizable habeas claim.

/// /// /// /// ///

1 Under the “mailbox rule,” when a pro se prisoner gives prison authorities a pleading to mail to court, the court deems the pleading constructively “filed” on the date it is signed. Roberts v. Marshall, 627 F.3d 768, 770 n.1 (9th Cir. 2010) (citation omitted).

II.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

On July 20, 2011, Johnson was convicted in San Luis…