Gonzalas v. Williams et al

Filing 7

ORDER. IT IS ORDERED that the Clerk shall file and ELECTRONICALLY SERVE the petition 1 -1 on the respondents. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall add Adam Paul Laxalt, Nevada Attorney General, as counsel for respondents. IT IS FURTHER ORD ERED that 2 petitioner's motion for appointment of counsel is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall ELECTRONICALLY SERVE the FPD with a copy of this order, together with a copy of the petition for writ of habeas corpus 1 -1. Signed by Judge Richard F. Boulware, II on 2/6/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF -cc: FPD - ADR)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 8 *** 9 LUIS GONZALAS, 10 Case No. 2:17-cv-01653-RFB-GWF Petitioner, ORDER v. 11 BRIAN WILLIMAS, et al., 12 Respondents. 13 14 15 Petitioner Luis Gonzalas has submitted a petition for a writ of habeas corpus and 16 has now paid the filing fee (see ECF No. 5). The court has reviewed the petition 17 pursuant to Habeas Rule 4, and it shall be docketed and served on respondents. 18 19 A petition for federal habeas corpus should include all claims for relief of which petitioner is aware. If petitioner fails to include such a claim in his petition, he may be 20 forever barred from seeking federal habeas relief upon that claim. See 28 U.S.C. § 21 22 2254(b) (successive petitions). If petitioner is aware of any claim not included in his 23 petition, he should notify the court of that as soon as possible, perhaps by means of a 24 motion to amend his petition to add the claim. 25 26 27 Petitioner has also filed a motion for appointment of counsel (ECF No. 2). There is no constitutional right to appointed counsel for a federal habeas corpus proceeding. Pennsylvania v. Finley, 481 U.S. 551, 555 (1987); Bonin v. Vasquez, 999 F.2d 425, 428 28 1 1 (9th Cir.1993). The decision to appoint counsel is generally discretionary. Chaney v. 2 Lewis, 801 F.2d 1191, 1196 (9th Cir.1986), cert. denied, 481 U.S. 1023 (1987); Bashor 3 v. Risley, 730 F.2d 1228, 1234 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 838 (1984). However, 4 counsel must be appointed if the complexities of the case are such that denial of 5 6 counsel would amount to a denial of due process, and where the petitioner is a person 7 of such limited education as to be incapable of fairly presenting his claims. See 8 Chaney, 801 F.2d at 1196; see also Hawkins v. Bennett, 423 F.2d 948 (8th Cir.1970). 9 Here, Gonzalas is serving a term of life with the possibility of parole after twenty years; 10 11 additionally, he raises numerous claims in his petition, some of which may involve more complex legal issues. Therefore, Gonzalas’ motion for counsel is granted. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Clerk shall file and ELECTRONICALLY SERVE the petition (ECF No. 1-1) on the respondents. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall add Adam Paul Laxalt, Nevada Attorney General, as counsel for respondents. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that petitioner’s motion for appointment of counsel (ECF No. 2) is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Federal Public Defender for the District of 20 21 22 Nevada (FPD) is appointed to represent petitioner. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall ELECTRONICALLY SERVE the 23 FPD with a copy of this order, together with a copy of the petition for writ of habeas 24 corpus (ECF No. 1-1). The FPD shall have thirty (30) days from the date of entry of this 25 order to file a notice of appearance or to indicate to the court its inability to represent 26 petitioner in these proceedings. 27 28 2 1 2 3 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that after counsel has appeared for petitioner in this case, the court will issue a scheduling order, which will, among other things, set a deadline for the filing of an amended petition. 4 5 DATED: February 6, 2018. 6 RICHARD F. BOULWARE, II 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 3

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?