Pablo v. Holder

Filing 4

ORDER (1) Denying (Doc. 3 ) Motion For Appointment of Counsel; (2) Granting (Doc. 2 ) Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis; and (3) Setting Schedule. The government shall file its response to the petition by September 13, 2010. Petitioner may file an optional reply by October 13, 2010. Signed by Judge Marilyn L. Huff on 7/30/2010. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service) (srm)

-AJB Pablo v. Holder

Doc. 4

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 On July 27, 2010, Tristan Carl Pablo ("Petitioner") filed a petition for writ of habeas 20 corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 along with motions to proceed in forma pauperis and for 21 appointment of counsel. (Doc. Nos. 1­3.) 22 I. Motion for Appointment of Counsel Under 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2)(B), a district court may appoint counsel for an 23 24 impoverished Petitioner seeking relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 when "the interests of justice 25 so require . . . ." This determination is within the discretion of the district court. See Bashor 26 v. Risley, 730 F.2d 1228, 1234 (9th Cir. 1984). Here, the petition sets forth its grounds for 27 relief with reasonable clarity, and the Court believes that Petitioner will be able to sufficiently 28 represent himself in the remaining proceedings. At this stage of the proceedings, the Court
-110cv1571

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
TRISTAN CARL PABLO, Plaintiff, vs. CASE NO. 10-CV-1571 H (AIB) ORDER: (1) DENYING MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL (2) GRANTING MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS (3) SETTING SCHEDULE

ERIC HOLDER, Attorney General, Defendant.

Dockets.Justia.com

1 concludes that the interests of justice do not require appointment of counsel. Therefore, the 2 Court DENIES petitioner's request for appointment of counsel without prejudice. 3 II. Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis 4 An action may proceed despite a plaintiff's failure to prepay the entire fee only if the

5 court grants the plaintiff leave to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). 6 See Rodriguez v. Cook, 169 F.3d 1176, 1177 (9th Cir. 1999). Plaintiff has submitted an 7 affidavit that sufficiently shows that he lacks the financial resources to pay filing fees. (Doc. 8 No. 2.) Therefore, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff leave to proceed in forma pauperis. 9 III. Scheduling 10 The government shall file its response to the petition by September 13, 2010. The

11 response shall include any and all documents relevant to the determination of the issues raised 12 by the petition. Petitioner may file an optional reply by October 13, 2010. Absent a 13 subsequent order to the contrary, the Court may submit this matter on the papers pursuant to 14 Local Civil Rule 7.1(d)(1). 15 IT IS SO ORDERED.

16 DATED: July 30, 2010 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
-210cv1571

______________________________ MARILYN L. HUFF, District Judge UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT