Doolin v. Wong

Filing 166

ORDER RE: (1) APPOINTMENT OF REPLACEMENT COUNSEL and (2) DISQUALIFICATION OF DISTRICT JUDGE re 164 signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 12/24/2014. (Lundstrom, T)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 KEITH ZON DOOLIN, 12 Petitioner, 13 14 15 Case No. 1:09-cv-01453-AWI-SAB DEATH PENALTY CASE v. ORDER RE: (1) APPOINTMENT OF REPLACEMENT COUNSEL, and (2) KEVIN CHAPPELL, AS WARDEN OF SAN DISQUALIFICATION OF DISTRICT JUDGE QUENTIN CALIFORNIA STATE PRISON, (ECF NO. 164) Respondent. 16 17 18 19 20 On December 11, 2014, Petitioner filed a pro se request seeking appointment of 21 replacement CJA counsel and disqualification of the District Judge assigned to this case. 22 Currently, CJA attorney Michael Levine is Doolin’s federal counsel of record. The 23 federal proceedings are being held in abeyance pending exhaustion of state remedies before the 24 California Supreme Court. Federal proceedings will not resume until the California Supreme 25 Court has issued a final ruling on Doolin’s pending state habeas corpus petition. See In Re 26 Doolin, S197391. 27 The matter remains under submission to the California Supreme Court. On July 1, 2013, the Court ordered the case referred to the Selection Board for the 28 1 1 Eastern District of California for recommendation of replacement counsel for Mr. Levine. To 2 date, the Court has not received the Selection Board’s recommendation. The Court will issue a 3 new order reminding the Selection Board of the need to appoint replacement counsel. The Court 4 will appoint replacement counsel after the Selection Board makes its recommendation. The pro se request regarding disqualification of the District Judge will not be considered 5 6 because Petitioner is represented by appointed counsel. Local Rule 191(c). 7 8 IT IS SO ORDERED. 9 Dated: December 24, 2014 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?