Grigsby v. Neven et al

Filing 6

ORDER Granting 1 Motion/Application for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. The Clerk of Court SHALL ADD attorney General Adam Paul Laxalt to the CM/ECF docket sheet as counsel for respondents and FILE and ELECTRONICALLY SERVE the petition (ECF No. 1-1) upon the respondents. FURTHER ORDERED that respondents shall have forty-five (45) days from the entry of this order within which to answer, or otherwise respond to, the petition. FURTHER ORDERED that 2 Motion to Appoint Counsel is DENIED. Signed by Judge Andrew P. Gordon on 3/8/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MMM)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15

DENNIS MARC GRIGSBY,
Petitioner,
vs.

Case No. 2:16-cv-01886-APG-CWH
ORDER

DWIGHT NEVEN, et al.,
Respondents.

16
17
18

This action is a pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254
by a Nevada state prisoner.

19

Petitioner has filed a motion to proceed in forma pauperis. (ECF No. 1). Based on the

20

information regarding petitioner's financial status, the Court finds that the motion to proceed in

21

forma pauperis should be granted. The petition shall now be filed and served on respondents.

22

Petitioner has filed a motion for the appointment of counsel. (ECF No. 2). Pursuant to 18

23

U.S.C. § 3006A(2)(B), the district court has discretion to appoint counsel when it determines that

24

the “interests of justice” require representation in a habeas corpus case. Petitioner has no

25

constitutional right to appointed counsel in a federal habeas corpus proceeding. Pennsylvania v.

26

Finley, 481 U.S. 551, 555 (1987); Bonin v. Vasquez, 999 F.2d 425, 428 (9th Cir. 1993). The

27

decision to appoint counsel is within the Court’s discretion. Chaney v. Lewis, 801 F.2d 1191, 1196

28

(9th Cir. 1986), cert. denied, 481 U.S. 1023 (1987); Bashor v. Risley, 730 F.2d 1228, 1234 (9th

1

Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 838 (1984). The petition in this action is sufficiently clear in

2

presenting the issues that petitioner wishes to bring. The issues in this case are not complex.

3

Petitioner’s motion for the appointment of counsel is denied.

4
5

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the application to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF
No. 1) is GRANTED.

6

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall FILE and ELECTRONICALLY

7

SERVE the petition (ECF No. 1-1) upon the respondents. The Clerk of Court SHALL ADD

8

attorney General Adam Paul Laxalt to the CM/ECF docket sheet as counsel for respondents.

9

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that respondents shall have forty-five (45) days from the

10

entry of this order within which to answer, or otherwise respond to, the petition. In their answer or

11

other response, respondents shall address all claims presented in the petition. Respondents shall

12

raise all potential affirmative defenses in the initial responsive pleading, including lack of

13

exhaustion and procedural default. Successive motions to dismiss will not be entertained. If an

14

answer is filed, respondents shall comply with the requirements of Rule 5 of the Rules Governing

15

Proceedings in the United States District Courts under 28 U.S.C. §2254. If an answer is filed,

16

petitioner shall have forty-five (45) days from the date of service of the answer to file a reply.

17

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that any state court record exhibits filed by respondents

18

shall be filed with a separate index of exhibits identifying the exhibits by number or letter. The

19

hard copy of all state court record exhibits shall be forwarded, for this case, to the staff attorneys in

20

the Reno Division of the Clerk of Court.

21
22
23
24

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that petitioner’s motion for the appointment of counsel
(ECF No. 2) is DENIED.
Dated: March 8, 2017.

25
26
27

ANDREW P. GORDON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

28
-2-