Gomez v. Andes

Background

John B. Gomez, identified as a state prisoner, filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 seeking a writ of habeas corpus, a court order addressing allegedly unlawful state custody. Chance Andes is identified as the acting warden and the respondent. Gomez paid the full filing fee.

Order to Show Cause

The court stated that the petition did not appear to be without merit based on its face. It therefore ordered the Clerk to serve the order on Andes and the Attorney General of California, identified as the respondent’s attorney, and to mail a copy to Gomez.

Within 60 days after the order’s issuance, Andes must file and serve an answer that complies with Rule 5 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases. The answer must explain why the requested writ should not issue and must include previously transcribed portions of the relevant state record.

Alternatively, Andes may file a motion to dismiss on procedural grounds within the same 60-day period. If that occurs, Gomez must file an opposition or statement that he does not oppose the motion within 60 days after receiving it. Andes may then file a reply within 14 days after receiving any opposition.

Other Requirements

If Gomez responds to an answer, he must file a written response called a traverse. If he does not do so, the petition will be treated as ready for decision 60 days after he is served with the answer. The order also requires Gomez to prosecute the case, keep the court and Andes informed of any address change, timely comply with court orders, and serve Andes’s counsel with communications filed with the court. Requests for extensions must be submitted at least seven days before the relevant deadline.

Disposition

Judge Araceli Martinez-Olguin issued an order to show cause and set the response process. The court did not grant or deny the petition and did not decide the merits of Gomez’s claims. It also did not rule on a motion to dismiss; it only authorized Andes to file one on procedural grounds.