Scott v. Sherman
Decision Date | 01 May 2019 |
Docket Number | No. 2:16-cv-1957 JAM KJN P,2:16-cv-1957 JAM KJN P |
Parties | THOMAS CHARLES SCOTT, Petitioner, v. STEWART SHERMAN, et al., Respondents. |
Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of California |
Petitioner is a state prisoner, proceeding without counsel. He filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner challenges a 2012 judgment of conviction for cultivating marijuana, possession of marijuana for sale, possession of concentrated cannabis, maintaining a place for narcotic trafficking, and possession of matter depicting children engaged in sexual conduct. He was sentenced to 25 years-to-life in state prison. After careful review of the record, this court concludes the petition should be denied.
Following his 2012 jury trial, petitioner was convicted of cultivating marijuana (Cal. Health & Saf. Code, § 11358), possession of marijuana for sale (Cal. Health & Saf. Code, § 11359), possession of concentrated cannabis (Cal. Health & Saf. Code, § 11357(a)), maintaining a place for narcotic trafficking (Cal. Health & Saf. Code, § 11366), and possession of matter depicting children engaged in sexual conduct (Cal. Pen. Code, § 311.11(b)). He was sentenced to 25 years-to-life on the first and fifth counts; sentences on the remaining counts were stayed (Cal. Pen. Code, § 654). (LD No. 1.)
Petitioner's appeal to the Third Appellate District of the California Court of Appeal (LD Nos. 2-4) resulted in the following disposition:
The judgment is modified to (1) reduce the criminal assessment imposed pursuant to Government Code section 70373, subdivision (a)(1) from $175 to $150, and (2) award defendant, in lieu of the 384 days originally received, 576 days of presentence custody credits, consisting of 384 actual days and 192 conduct days. As so modified, the judgment is affirmed. Th trial court is directed to (1) amend the abstract of judgment to reflect these modifications, and (2) correct section 1 of the abstract of judgment to reflect that defendant's sentence on count V is to run concurrent to his sentence on count I. ...
(LD No. 5 at 13.) Thereafter, the California Supreme Court denied his Petition for Review. (LD Nos. 6 & 7.)
On June 1, 2015, petitioner filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus in the Tehama County Superior Court. (LD No. 8.) Respondent served its informal response on July 9, 2015. (LD No 9) and petitioner filed a reply brief on August 3, 2015 (LD No. 10). The Tehama County Superior Court denied the petition in an order dated September 16, 2015. (LD No. 11.)
Subsequently, petitioner filed a habeas petition with the Third Appellate District in November 2015. (LD No. 12.) That court summarily denied the petition in an order dated January 22, 2016. (LD No. 13; see also https:\\www.appellatecases.courtinfo.ca.gov [C080644].)
On February 29, 2016, a petition for writ of habeas corpus was filed with the California Supreme Court. (LD No. 14; see also https:\\www.appellatecases.courtinfo.ca.gov [S232743].) The state's highest court summarily denied the petition on May 25, 2016. (LD No. 15.)
On August 18, 2016, petitioner filed the instant petition and related points and authorities. (ECF Nos. 1 & 4.) Respondent filed an answer to the petition on December 20, 2016. (ECF No. 18.) On February 13, 2017, petitioner filed his traverse. (ECF No. 24.)
The following facts are taken from the California Court of Appeal for the Third AppellateDistrict's unpublished decision filed October 31, 2014:
To continue reading
Request your trial