Eubanks v. Johnson

Filing 6

ORDER: (1) Granting 1 Request for Appointment of Counsel and (2) Appointing Counsel pursuant to Recommendation of Selection Board. Petitioner's request for appointment of counsel is GRANTED, and pursuant to Local Rule HC.3(d) and the recommend ation of the Selection Board for the United States District Court for the Southern District of California, the Court APPOINTS Rebecca Jones and Ellis M. Johnston to represent Petitioner Susan Eubanks in her capital habeas corpus proceedings. Signed b y Judge Dana M. Sabraw on 3/22/2017. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(cc: Attorney Rebecca Jones; Attorney Ellis M. Johnston; Attorney Patrick M. Ford; Attorney Michael Meaney; Respondent Derral Adams, Acting Warden of Central California Women's Facility at Chowchilla; the Clerk of the San Diego County Superior Court; Xavier Becerra, Attorney General of the State of California; Meagan J. Beale, Deputy Attorney General of the State of California; Office of the District Attorney of San Diego County; Elaine A. Alexander, Appellate Defenders, Inc.; Joseph Schlesinger, California Appellate Project, San Francisco; Reuben C. Cahn, Federal Defenders of San Diego, Inc.; and Attorney Charles M. Sevilla) (aef)

!

ptk,®

i
2

mmn

ph 2*

i

3
4

J; •
• 'r/'1

«■

■mSM#

5

6
7

8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

Case No.: 17cv0016 DMS (MDD)

SUSAN DIANNE EUBANKS,
Petitioner,

12
13

v.

14

DEATH PENALTY CASE

DERRAL ADAMS, Acting Warden of
Central California Women’s Facility at
Chowchilla,

15
16

ORDER:
(1) GRANTING REQUEST FOR
APOINTMENT OF COUNSEL AND

Respondent.

(2) APPOINTING COUNSEL
PURSUANT TO
RECOMMENDATION OF
SELECTION BOARD

17
18
19
20

On January 4, 2017, Petitioner Susan Eubanks filed a request for appointment of

21

counsel for federal habeas proceedings, an accompanying declaration, and a civil cover

22

sheet. (ECF No. 1.) On January 12, 2017, the Court issued an Order Re Action Required

23

to Avoid Dismissal, noting the Petitioner had neither moved to proceed in forma pauperis

24

[“IFP”] nor paid the $5.00 filing fee and stating that the Court could not proceed until

25

Petitioner either paid the filing fee or qualified to proceed IFP. (ECF No. 2.) On March 7,

26

2017, Petitioner filed a motion for leave to proceed IFP along with a trust account statement

27

which reflected a $90.70 balance in her prison trust account. (ECF No. 3.) On March 13,

28

2017, the Court denied that motion and advised Petitioner that without payment of the
l
17cv0016 DMS (MDD)

1

filing fee, the case was subject to dismissal without prejudice. (ECF No. 4 at 1-2.) On

2

March 16, 2017, Petitioner paid the $5.00 filing fee. (ECF No. 5.) Accordingly, the Court

3

now turns to Petitioner’s request for appointment of counsel.

4

I.

5

BACKGROUND

6

Petitioner was convicted in San Diego County Superior Court of four counts of first

7

degree murder with the special circumstance of multiple murder and sentenced to death.

8

On December 19, 2011, the California Supreme Court affirmed the convictions and

9

sentence on direct appeal. People v. Eubanks. 53 Cal. 4th 110 (2011). Petitioner states

10

that she did not file a petition for a writ of certiorari in the United States Supreme Court.

11

(ECF No. 1 at 2.) The California Supreme Court issued the Remittur in the case on January

12

19, 2012.

13

On February 7, 2011, while the direct appeal was still pending, Petitioner filed a

14

habeas petition (Case No. SI90405) with the California Supreme Court. An informal

15

response was filed on September 8, 2011, and a reply was filed on September 20, 2012.

16

The California Supreme Court has not yet ruled on the state habeas petition.

17

II.

18

DISCUSSION

19

In the declaration accompanying her request for appointment of counsel, Petitioner

20 states that she has a pending and fully-briefed state habeas petition in the California
21

Supreme Court “unless and until the court issues an order to show cause or orders

22 supplemental briefing.” (ECF No. 1 at 3.) Petitioner states that “[t]he court may issue a
23

summary denial at any time, which is final immediately,” notes “[a]t that point, the time

24 for seeking federal review will begin running,” and declares: “I am submitting a request
25 for counsel now in anticipation of this contingency.” (Id.) Petitioner indicates that the
26 attorneys who represented her on her state appeal and in her state habeas proceedings have
27 each advised that they are not available to represent Petitioner in the federal proceedings.
28
2
17cv0016 DMS (MDD)

1

(Id.) Petitioner also states that: “I am indigent and do not have the assets to retain an

2

attorney to represent me in these proceedings.” (Id.)

3

The Ninth Circuit previously stated that “[w]hen ... an appeal of a state criminal

4

conviction is pending, a would-be habeas corpus petitioner must await the outcome of his

5

appeal before his state remedies are exhausted....” Sherwood v. Tomkins, 716 F.2d 632,

6

634 (9th Cir. 1983); see also 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b)-(c). While Petitioner’s state habeas

7

petition is currently pending in state court, the Ninth Circuit has more recently specified

8

that Sherwood applies only to a pending direct appeal. See Henderson v. Johnson, 710

9

F.3d 872, 873-74 (9th Cir. 2013) (per curiam) (rejecting district court’s reliance on

10

Sherwood to dismiss mixed federal habeas petition filed while state habeas petition was

11

pending without allowing leave to amend or considering a stay, clarifying that “Sherwood

12

stands for the proposition that a district court may not adjudicate a federal petition while a

13

petitioner’s direct state appeal is pending.”) (emphasis added.)

14

Petitioner’s state appeal is concluded, as the California Supreme Court issued a remittur.

15

See Cal. Rules of Court, Rules 8.532, 8.540, 8.642.

As noted above,

16

The relevant federal statute which provides for the appointment of counsel in capital

17

habeas proceedings simply states that: “In any post conviction proceeding under section

18

2254 or 2255 of title 28, United States Code, seeking to vacate or set aside a death sentence,

19

any defendant who is or becomes financially unable to obtain adequate representation or

20

investigative, expert, or other reasonably necessary services shall be entitled to the

21

appointment of one or more attorneys and the furnishing of such other services in

22

accordance with subsections (b) through (f).” 18 U.S.C. § 3599(a)(2). This district’s local

23

rules provide for the appointment of federal habeas counsel “at the earliest practicable

24

time.” See CivLR HC.3(d)(l). Upon review of this matter with reference to the above

25

authorities, Petitioner’s request for appointment of counsel appears reasonable and is

26

therefore GRANTED.

27

III

28

III
3
17cv0016 DMS (MDD)

1

During the pendency of this matter, the Court received a letter from the Selection

2

Board, in connection with Petitioner’s request for counsel.1 Based on the Selection Board’s

3

determination that recommended counsel have the requisite familiarity with federal and

4

capital case work, experience with the type of issues presented in this particular case, and

5

the Board’s statement that counsel are willing to represent Petitioner, the Court

6

APPOINTS Attorneys Rebecca Jones and Ellis M. Johnston as counsel for Petitioner in

7

this matter.

8

III.

9

CONCLUSION

10

Pursuant to Local Rule HC.3(d) and 18 U.S.C. § 3599, Petitioner’s request for

11

appointment of counsel is GRANTED, and pursuant to Local Rule HC.3(d) and the

12 recommendation of the Selection Board for the United States District Court for the
13

Southern District of California, the Court APPOINTS Rebecca Jones and Ellis M.

14 Johnston to represent Petitioner Susan Eubanks in her capital habeas corpus proceedings.
The Clerk of the Court shall serve a certified copy of this order on Petitioner Susan

15

16 Eubanks; Attorney Rebecca Jones; Attorney Ellis M. Johnston; Attorney Patrick M. Ford;
17 Attorney Michael Meaney; Respondent Derral Adams, Acting Warden of Central
18

California Women’s Facility at Chowchilla; the Clerk of the San Diego County Superior

19

Court; Xavier Becerra, Attorney General of the State of California; Meagan J. Beale,

20 Deputy Attorney General of the State of California; Office of the District Attorney of San
21

Diego County; Elaine A. Alexander, Appellate Defenders, Inc.; Joseph Schlesinger,

22 III
23

III

24 III
25

III

26
27
28

That letter was sent directly to the undersigned’s chambers. Pursuant to this Order, that
letter will be filed under seal in the Court file.
i

4

17cv0016 DMS (MDD)

1

California Appellate Project, San Francisco; Reuben C. Cahn, Federal Defenders of San

2

Diego, Inc.; and Attorney Charles M. Sevilla.

3
4

5

6

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: [Date]
Hon. Dana M. Sabraw
United States District Judge

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
5
17cv0016 DMS (MDD)