(HC) Scott v. Fox
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 9/10/2020 DENYING 101 Motion to Appoint Counsel and DENYING 102 Motion for an Expedited Response. (Tupolo, A)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
MICHAEL LADONTE SCOTT,
No. 2:18-cv-2687 TLN KJN P
ROBERT W. FOX,
Petitioner is a state prisoner, proceeding without counsel, in this closed case, which is
presently on appeal.
On September 3, 2020, petitioner renewed his request for the appointment of counsel.
There currently exists no absolute right to appointment of counsel in habeas proceedings. See
Nevius v. Sumner, 105 F.3d 453, 460 (9th Cir. 1996). However, 18 U.S.C. § 3006A authorizes
the appointment of counsel at any stage of the case “if the interests of justice so require.” See
Rule 8(c), Fed. R. Governing § 2254 Cases. On August 19, 2020, the district court denied the
petition for writ of habeas corpus, and declined to grant a certificate of appealability. Therefore,
the court does not find that the interests of justice would be served by the appointment of counsel.
On September 3, 2020, petitioner also filed a motion for an expedited response/decision
because he has been diagnosed positive for COVID-19. The court regrets that plaintiff is
suffering from COVID-19, and hopes that plaintiff makes a speedy recovery. That said, this court
has issued its decision, and no further decision or response is required by this court. Indeed, this
court now lacks jurisdiction because the case is on appeal. Therefore, any further motions should
be filed in petitioner’s appellate case currently pending in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, 95
7th Street, San Francisco, CA 94103. Petitioner’s appeal was processed on September 8, 2020,
and has not yet been assigned a case number by the appellate court, but petitioner will be notified
of such case number once it is assigned.
The instant petition for writ of habeas corpus was denied on August 19, 2020, and
judgment was entered. Therefore, documents filed by petitioner hereafter will be disregarded and
no orders will issue in response to future filings
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Petitioner’s request for appointment of counsel (ECF No. 101) is denied.
2. Petitioner’s motion (ECF No. 102) is denied.
Dated: September 10, 2020
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?