Holden v. Nevins et al

Filing 57

ORDER. IT IS ORDERED that 51 petitioner's proper person motion for withdrawal of attorney is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that 52 petitioner's proper-person motion for appointment of counsel is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that 55 petitioner's proper-person motion to stay is DENIED. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 11/14/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ADR)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA

6
7
8
9

JIM BASS HOLDEN,

10

Petitioner,

11

vs.

12

WARDEN NEVINS, et al.,

13

Case No. 2:13-cv-00668-JCM-GWF

Respondents.

ORDER

14
15

Petitioner has filed a motion for withdrawal of attorney (ECF No. 51), a motion for

16

appointment of counsel (ECF No. 52), and a motion to stay (ECF No. 55). Counsel represents

17

petitioner, and petitioner cannot file proper-person motions. LR IA 11-6(a). That reason alone is

18

enough to deny these motions.

19

Additionally, respondents’ arguments are correct. Petitioner wants new counsel to present a

20

new Sixth Amendment claim. This claim is untimely on its own, and it also does not relate back to

21

the claim in the amended petition (ECF No. 39) or any of the claims in the initial petition (ECF No.

22

4). See 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1); Mayle v. Felix, 545 U.S. 644 (2005). The amended petition is fully

23

briefed and is ready for decision. Under these circumstances, further amendment would be futile.

24
25
26
27
28

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that petitioner’s proper person motion for withdrawal of
attorney (ECF No. 51) is DENIED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that petitioner’s proper-person motion for appointment of
counsel (ECF No. 52) is DENIED.

1
2
3

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that petitioner’s proper-person motion to stay (ECF No. 55) is
DENIED.
DATED: November 14, 2017.

4
5

_________________________________
JAMES C. MAHAN
United States District Judge

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2-