Stull

Stull v. Smith

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaNovember 17, 20234:23-cv-04756California1,176 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 JAMES CONRAD STULL, Case No. 23-cv-04756-JST

Petitioner,

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

v.

RON BROOMFIELD, Respondent.

12 Petitioner, an inmate at San Quentin State Prison, has filed a pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging a prison disciplinary decision. ECF No. 1. His petition is now before the Court for review pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2243 and Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts. Petitioner has paid the filing fee. ECF No. 6. DISCUSSION A. Standard of Review This court may entertain a petition for 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 …

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.