Trevizo v. Borders
Filing
8
ORDER Appointing Federal Defender as Counsel for Petitioner, signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 1/3/17: 90-Day Deadline. (Hellings, J)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
9
10
ALBERT TREVISO,
11
CASE NO. 1:16-cv-01845-DAD-SKO HC
Petitioner,
ORDER APPOINTING FEDERAL DEFENDER
AS COUNSEL FOR PETITIONER
12
v.
13
DEAN BORDERS, Warden,
14
Respondent.
15
16
17
Petitioner, proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
18 § 2254, has requested appointment of counsel. In habeas proceedings, no absolute right to appointment
th
19 of counsel currently exists. See, e.g., Anderson v. Heinze, 258 F.2d 479, 481 (9 Cir. 1958); Mitchell v.
th
20 Wyrick, 727 F.2d 773, 774 (8 Cir. 1984). Nonetheless, a court may appoint counsel at any stage of the
21 case "if the interests of justice so require." 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2)(B); Rule 8(c), Rules Governing
22 Section 2254 Cases.
23
Petitioner provides documentation of a hearing impairment and possible developmental disability
24 that limits his ability to read, write, and understand legal materials. He contends that because he did not
25 understand his constitutional rights, he pleaded guilty to crimes that he did not commit. The petition
26 appears to be untimely, and whether it is subject to equitable tolling is unclear.
27
The Court finds that the interests of justice require the appointment of counsel at this time.
28 Pursuant to Rule 8(c) of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, it is hereby ORDERED that the
1
29
30
1 Federal Defender is APPOINTED to represent Petitioner. Within ninety (90) days of the date of
2 issuance of this order, counsel shall review the legal and factual basis for the petition and file an
3 amended petition, if appropriate.
4
5
IT IS SO ORDERED.
6 Dated:
7
January 3, 2017
/s/
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Sheila K. Oberto
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?