Opinion
S283251
05-29-2024
WASHINGTON (RODERICK NATHANIEL) ON H.C.
The petition for writ of habeas corpus has been read and considered. Petitioner contends, among other claims, that he is entitled to relief under the Racial Justice Act of 2020 (Pen. Code, § 745). In this respect, petitioner alleges that he “was subjected to oversentencing” and wrongful denial of parole in retaliation “for exercising his First Amendment right in violation of the RJA.”
The petition fails to make a prima facie showing of entitlement to relief under the Racial Justice Act. (Pen. Code, § 1473, subd. (e).) The petition fails to allege particularized facts that adequately describe the alleged actions and how they reflected racial bias or animus, or to support the claim that defendant was charged, convicted, or sentenced in a more severe manner than similarly situated individuals of other races, ethnicities, or national origins. Nor does petitioner describe or attach supporting documentary evidence concerning racial bias or animus or the use of racially discriminatory language. (Pen. Code, § 745, subd. (a)(1)-(4); cf. In re Swain (1949) 34 Cal.2d 300, 304 [a petition for writ of habeas corpus must allege sufficient facts with particularity]; cf. also People v. Duvall (1995) 9 Cal.4th 464, 474 [a petition for writ of habeas corpus must include copies of reasonably available documentary evidence].)
The petition for writ of habeas corpus is denied.