Gadlin v. Pfeiffer
3:20-cv-02867
N.D. Cal.Jul 8, 2020Background:
- Gregory A. Gadlin, a California state prisoner, was convicted of first-degree murder with personal use of a firearm and sentenced to 117 years to life.
- The California Court of Appeal affirmed the conviction; the California Supreme Court denied review.
- Gadlin filed a pro se federal habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 in the Northern District of California asserting four claims.
- Claims: (1) insufficient evidence; (2) trial court erred by admitting/limiting a firearms expert's testimony; (3) erroneous jury instruction on flight; (4) improper restitution award.
- The district court granted in forma pauperis, found the petition's claims (liberally construed) sufficient to require a response, and ordered the state to file an answer or a procedurally based motion to dismiss within 84 days.
Issues:
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Insufficient evidence | Gadlin: evidence did not support conviction | State: appellate affirmance indicates sufficiency | Court: Claim adequately pleaded; respondent must answer (no merits ruling) |
| Firearms expert testimony | Gadlin: trial court should have excluded or limited expert | State: testimony admissible/harmless | Court: Claim adequately pleaded; respondent must answer (no merits ruling) |
| Flight jury instruction | Gadlin: flight instruction was erroneous | State: instruction proper or harmless on appeal | Court: Claim adequately pleaded; respondent must answer (no merits ruling) |
| Restitution award | Gadlin: restitution was improper | State: restitution lawful/appropriate | Court: Claim adequately pleaded; respondent must answer (no merits ruling) |
Key Cases Cited
- Rose v. Hodges, 423 U.S. 19 (1975) (federal habeas jurisdiction under § 2254)
- McFarland v. Scott, 512 U.S. 849 (1994) (heightened pleading requirements for habeas petitions)
- Aubut v. Maine, 431 F.2d 688 (1st Cir. 1970) (notice pleading insufficient; petition must show real possibility of constitutional error)
- Martinez v. Johnson, 104 F.3d 769 (5th Cir. 1997) (Rule 41(b) dismissal for failure to prosecute applies in habeas cases)