Lynch v. State of Nevada et al

Filing 7

ORDER denying 1 Motion/Application for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis; ORDER denying 4 Motion for Appointment of Counsel. FURTHER ORDERED that respondents shall file a response to the petition, including potentially by motion to dismi ss, within ninety (90) days of service of the petition. FURTHER ORDERED that petitioner shall have forty-five (45) days from service of the answer, motion to dismiss, or other response to file a reply or opposition. FURTHER ORDERED that the parties SHALL SEND courtesy copies of all exhibits in this case to the Clerk of Court, 400 S. Virginia St., Reno, NV, 89501. Signed by Judge Richard F. Boulware, II on 12/7/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - JM)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

8

***

9

OSSIRIS DIZON LYNCH,

10

Case No. 2:17-cv-01897-RFB-NJK
Petitioner,

ORDER

v.
11
STATE OF NEVADA,
12
Respondent.
13
14

Petitioner Ossiris Dizon Lynch has submitted a pro se petition for writ of habeas

15

corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. He has now paid the filing fee (see ECF No. 5),

16

and therefore, his application to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 1) shall be denied

17

as moot. The court has reviewed the petition pursuant to Habeas Rule 4, and it shall be

18

docketed and served on respondents.

19

The court notes that Lynch submitted what he titled a petition as well as an

20

amended petition (ECF Nos. 1-1, 1-2). However, he clearly states in the amended petition

21

that he seeks to add those claims to the original petition. Accordingly, in the interests of

22

judicial efficiency, the court shall construe the two filings together as the petition.

23

A petition for federal habeas corpus should include all claims for relief of which

24

petitioner is aware. If petitioner fails to include such a claim in his petition, he may be

25

forever barred from seeking federal habeas relief upon that claim.

26

§2254(b) (successive petitions). If petitioner is aware of any claim not included in his

27

petition, he should notify the court of that as soon as possible, perhaps by means of a

28

motion to amend his petition to add the claim.
1

See 28 U.S.C.

1

Petitioner has also submitted a motion for appointment of counsel (ECF No. 4).

2

There is no constitutional right to appointed counsel for a federal habeas corpus

3

proceeding. Pennsylvania v. Finley, 481 U.S. 551, 555 (1987); Bonin v. Vasquez, 999

4

F.2d 425, 428 (9th Cir.1993). The decision to appoint counsel is generally discretionary.

5

Chaney v. Lewis, 801 F.2d 1191, 1196 (9th Cir.1986), cert. denied, 481 U.S. 1023 (1987);

6

Bashor v. Risley, 730 F.2d 1228, 1234 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 838 (1984).

7

However, counsel must be appointed if the complexities of the case are such that denial

8

of counsel would amount to a denial of due process, and where the petitioner is a person

9

of such limited education as to be incapable of fairly presenting his claims. See Chaney,

10

801 F.2d at 1196; see also Hawkins v. Bennett, 423 F.2d 948 (8th Cir.1970). Here,

11

Lynch’s petition is clear in presenting the issues that he wishes to raise, and the legal

12

issues are not particularly complex. Therefore, counsel is not justified at this time.

13

Lynch’s motion is denied.

14
15
16

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that petitioner’s application to proceed in forma
pauperis (ECF No. 1) is DENIED as moot.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall file ECF Nos. 1-1 and 1-2 together

17

as the petition.

18

respondents.

19
20

The Clerk shall ELECTRONICALLY SERVE the petition on the

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall add Adam Paul Laxalt, Nevada
Attorney General, as counsel for respondents.

21

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that respondents shall file a response to the petition,

22

including potentially by motion to dismiss, within ninety (90) days of service of the

23

petition, with any requests for relief by petitioner by motion otherwise being subject to the

24

normal briefing schedule under the local rules. Any response filed shall comply with the

25

remaining provisions below, which are entered pursuant to Habeas Rule 5.

26

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that any procedural defenses raised by respondents in this

27

case shall be raised together in a single consolidated motion to dismiss. In other words,

28

the court does not wish to address any procedural defenses raised herein either in
2

1

seriatum fashion in multiple successive motions to dismiss or embedded in the answer.

2

Procedural defenses omitted from such motion to dismiss will be subject to potential

3

waiver.

4

procedural defenses, if any, with their response on the merits, except pursuant to 28

5

U.S.C. § 2254(b)(2) as to any unexhausted claims clearly lacking merit. If respondents

6

do seek dismissal of unexhausted claims under § 2254(b)(2): (a) they shall do so within

7

the single motion to dismiss not in the answer; and (b) they shall specifically direct their

8

argument to the standard for dismissal under § 2254(b)(2) set forth in Cassett v. Stewart,

9

406 F.3d 614, 623-24 (9th Cir. 2005).

Respondents shall not file a response in this case that consolidates their

In short, no procedural defenses, including

10

exhaustion, shall be included with the merits in an answer. All procedural defenses,

11

including exhaustion, instead must be raised by motion to dismiss.

12

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, in any answer filed on the merits, respondents

13

shall specifically cite to and address the applicable state court written decision and state

14

court record materials, if any, regarding each claim within the response as to that claim.

15

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

16

service of the answer, motion to dismiss, or other response to file a reply or opposition,

17

with any other requests for relief by respondents by motion otherwise being subject to the

18

normal briefing schedule under the local rules.

19

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that any additional state court record exhibits filed

20

herein by either petitioner or respondents shall be filed with a separate index of exhibits

21

identifying the exhibits by number. The CM/ECF attachments that are filed further shall

22

be identified by the number of the exhibit in the attachment.

23
24
25

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties SHALL SEND courtesy copies of all
exhibits in this case to the Clerk of Court, 400 S. Virginia St., Reno, NV, 89501, directed
to the attention of “Staff Attorney” on the outside of the mailing address label. Additionally,

26
27
28

in the future, all parties shall provide courtesy copies of any additional exhibits submitted
to the court in this case, in the manner described above.
3

1
2

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that petitioner’s motion for appointment of counsel
(ECF No. 4) is DENIED.

3
4

DATED: 7 December 2017.

5
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
4