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)
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?