Bennett v. The People

Filing 36

ORDER by Judge James Donato denying 28 Motion for Hearing; denying 28 Motion to Appoint Counsel. (lrcS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/17/2017)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

DAVID BENNETT,
Petitioner,

8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

Case No. 16-cv-01918-JD

ORDER

v.

Re: Dkt. No. 28
DEBBIE ASUNCION,
Respondent.

12
13

Petitioner, a California prisoner, filed a pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant

14

to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. This action is fully briefed and was recently reassigned to the Court.

15

Petitioner has requested the appointment of counsel. The Sixth Amendment’s right to counsel

16

does not apply in habeas corpus actions. Knaubert v. Goldsmith, 791 F.2d 722, 728 (9th Cir.

17

1986). However, 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2)(B) provides that in habeas cases, whenever “the court

18

determines that the interests of justice so require”, representation may be provided for any

19

financially eligible person. Petitioner has presented his claims adequately, and they are not

20

particularly complex. The request is denied without prejudice.

21

Petitioner has also requested an evidentiary hearing. The petition presents two claims: (1)

22

that trial and appellate counsel rendered ineffective assistance; and (2) that the prosecutor violated

23

Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963). Petitioner’s request for an evidentiary hearing involves

24

his allegations that the district attorney did not have legal grounds to prosecute him, there were

25

violations of the Fourth Amendment and there was an improper photo line-up. None of these

26

allegations concern the underlying claims in the petition and the record before the Court contains

27

all the information relevant to the claims. “[A]n evidentiary hearing is not required on issues that

28

can be resolved by reference to the state court record.” Schriro v. Landrigan, 550 U.S. 465, 474

1

(2007) (quoting Totten v. Merkle, 137 F.3d 1172, 1176 (9th Cir. 1998)). The motion is denied

2

without prejudice.

3

For the foregoing reasons, the Court hereby orders as follows:

4

Petitioner’s motion for the appointment of counsel and an evidentiary hearing (Docket No.

5
6
7

28) is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: August 17, 2017

8
9
JAMES DONATO
United States District Judge

10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

3
4

DAVID BENNETT,

Case No. 16-cv-01918-JD

Plaintiff,
5
v.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

6
7

DEBBIE ASUNCION,
Defendant.

8
9
10

I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S.
District Court, Northern District of California.

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15

That on August 17, 2017, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the attached, by
placing said copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter listed, by
depositing said envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into an inter-office delivery
receptacle located in the Clerk's office.

16
17
18

David Bennett ID: V90090
California Medical Facility Housing: Q3 - 320
P.O. Box 2000
Vacaville, CA 95696-2000

19
20
21

Dated: August 17, 2017

22
23

Susan Y. Soong
Clerk, United States District Court

24
25
26
27

By:________________________
LISA R. CLARK, Deputy Clerk to the
Honorable JAMES DONATO

28
3