Bonilla v. Ayers
Filing
135
ORDER LIFTING STAY AND DENYING PETITIONERS REQUEST TO PROCEED WITHOUT COUNSEL. Signed by Judge Claudia Wilken on 8/29/2012. (ndr, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/29/2012)
1
2
3
4
5
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
6
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
7
OAKLAND DIVISION
8
9
STEVEN W. BONILLA,
Case Number C 08-471 CW
DEATH PENALTY CASE
10
Petitioner,
11
v.
12
13
MICHAEL MARTEL, Acting Warden of
San Quentin State Prison,
14
ORDER LIFTING STAY AND
DENYING PETITIONER’S
REQUEST TO PROCEED WITHOUT
COUNSEL
Respondent.
15
16
17
18
Petitioner Steven Bonilla has been sentenced to death by the
19
Superior Court of California for the County of Alameda.
20
January 22, 2008, while his state habeas case was still being
21
litigated, Bonilla filed a request for appointment of counsel for
22
his future federal habeas litigation in this Court, under case
23
number C-08-471 CW.
24
Court granted his request for appointment of counsel and referred
25
this action to the Northern District’s Selection Board for the
26
recommendation of qualified counsel to represent Petitioner in
27
these proceedings.
28
On
Pursuant to Habeas Local Rule 2254-25, this
On May 2, 2012, this Court issued an order staying all
proceedings in this matter until appointment of counsel to
1
represent Petitioner, and on May 23, 2012, this Court denied
2
Petitioner’s request to represent himself in these proceedings.
3
On July 25, 2012, this court issued an order appointing the
4
Office of the Federal Public Defender for the District of Nevada
5
to represent Petitioner.
6
hereby LIFTED.
Accordingly, the stay in this matter is
7
Despite the appointment of counsel, Petitioner has continued
8
to file numerous pro se pleadings, including a motion to withdraw
9
his request for court-appointed counsel.
For the reasons set
10
forth in this Court’s order of May 23, 2012, Petitioner’s motion
11
is DENIED.
12
post-conviction proceedings.
13
California, 528 U.S. 152, 163 (2000); Tamalini v. Stewart, 249 F.
14
3d 895, 901-902 (9th Cir. 2001).
15
discretion, finds that self-representation would not be in
16
Petitioner’s best interests.
17
unwise, and considering the complexity of capital habeas
18
litigation, would likely be detrimental to Petitioner.
19
The right to self-representation does not extend to
Martinez v. Court of Appeal of
This Court, exercising its
Self-representation is often
The remainder of Petitioner’s pending pro se requests and
20
motions are DENIED.
21
pending motions.
The Clerk of Court shall terminate all
22
23
IT IS SO ORDERED.
24
25
26
27
DATED:
8/29/2012
________________
__________________________________
CLAUDIA WILKEN
United States District Judge
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?