Denson v. Neven et al

Filing 31

ORDER. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that 30 petitioner's motion for appointment of counsel is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that respondents shall have 60 days from the date of entry of this order to answer or otherwise respond to the amended pet ition for writ of habeas corpus 29 . IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if respondents file an answer, petitioner shall have 60 days to file a reply. Signed by Judge Andrew P. Gordon on 5/31/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ADR)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 7 8 RICHARD DENSON, 9 Petitioner, 10 vs. 11 DWIGHT NEVEN, et al., 12 13 2:15-cv-01473-APG-PAL ORDER Respondents. _____________________________/ 14 15 In this habeas corpus action, brought pro se by Nevada prisoner Richard Denson, Denson 16 filed an amended petition for writ of habeas corpus on May 25, 2017 (ECF No. 29). The Court will 17 now set a schedule for respondents to respond to the amended habeas petition, and for further 18 proceedings in this action. 19 On May 25, 2017, Denson filed a motion for appointment of counsel (ECF No. 30). The 20 court will deny Denson’s motion for appointment of counsel. “Indigent state prisoners applying for 21 habeas corpus relief are not entitled to appointed counsel unless the circumstances of a particular 22 case indicate that appointed counsel is necessary to prevent due process violations.” Chaney v. 23 Lewis, 801 F.2d 1191, 1196 (9th Cir. 1986) (citing Kreiling v. Field, 431 F.2d 638, 640 (9th Cir. 24 1970) (per curiam). The Court may, however, appoint counsel at any stage of the proceedings “if 25 the interests of justice so require.” See 18 U.S.C. § 3006A; see also Rule 8(c), Rules Governing § 26 2254 Cases; Chaney, 801 F.2d at 1196. The Court has reviewed Denson’s amended habeas petition, 1 and the other documents he has filed in this case, and determines that appointment of counsel is not 2 warranted. 3 4 5 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that petitioner’s motion for appointment of counsel (ECF No. 30) is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that respondents shall have 60 days from the date of entry 6 of this order to answer or otherwise respond to the amended petition for writ of habeas corpus 7 (ECF No. 29). 8 9 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if respondents file an answer, petitioner shall have 60 days to file a reply. If respondents file a motion to dismiss, petitioner shall have 60 days to file a 10 response to the motion to dismiss, and respondents shall, thereafter, have 30 days to file a reply in 11 support of the motion. 12 Dated: May 31, 2017. 13 14 15 16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 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?