Wright, Jr. v. LeGrand et al

Filing 5

ORDER. IT IS ORDERED that the clerk shall FILE and ELECTRONICALLY SERVE the petition [1-1] upon the respondents. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that respondents shall have forty-five (45) days from entry of this order within which to answer, or otherwise res pond to, the petition. Successive motions to dismiss will not be entertained. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that petitioner shall serve upon the AttorneyGeneral of the State of Nevada a copy of every pleading. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that petitioner's m otion for the appointment of counsel [1-2] is DENIED. (See Order regarding submission of state court record exhibits). (Deadline set in Habeas Corpus case for 9/27/2012. Responses due by 9/27/2012.) Signed by Judge Larry R. Hicks on 8/10/2012. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MLC)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

8
9

JAMES WRIGHT, JR.,

10

Petitioner,

11

vs.

12

ROBERT LeGRAND, et al.,

13

Respondents.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
/

3:12-cv-00286-LRH-VPC
ORDER

14
15

This is a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 in which petitioner,

16

a state prisoner, is proceeding pro se. On June 25, 2012, petitioner paid the filing fee for this action.

17

(ECF No. 4.)

18

Petitioner has filed a motion for the appointment of counsel. (ECF No. 1-2.) There is no

19

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

20

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

21

decision to appoint counsel is generally discretionary. Chaney v. Lewis, 801 F.2d 1191, 1196 (9th

22

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

23

cert. denied, 469 U.S. 838 (1984). However, counsel must be appointed if the complexities of the

24

case are such that denial of counsel would amount to a denial of due process, and where the

25

petitioner is a person of such limited education as to be incapable of fairly presenting his claims. See

26

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

27

this case are not especially complex, and petitioner has shown that he is capable of presenting his

28

claims and arguments in a relatively clear and organized fashion. Therefore, it does not appear that

1
2

counsel is justified in this instance.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the clerk shall FILE and ELECTRONICALLY

3

SERVE the petition (ECF No. 1-1) upon the respondents. A petition for federal habeas corpus

4

should include all claims for relief of which petitioner is aware. If petitioner fails to include such a

5

claim in his petition, he may be forever barred from seeking federal habeas relief upon that claim.

6

See 28 U.S.C. §2254(b) (successive petitions). If petitioner is aware of any claim not included in his

7

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

8

amend his petition to add the claim.

9

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

10

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

11

response, respondents shall address any claims presented by petitioner in his petition as well as any

12

claims presented by petitioner in any statement of additional claims. Respondents shall raise all

13

potential affirmative defenses in the initial responsive pleading, including lack of exhaustion and

14

procedural default. Successive motions to dismiss will not be entertained. If an answer is filed,

15

respondents shall comply with the requirements of Rule 5 of the Rules Governing Proceedings in the

16

United States District Courts under 28 U.S.C. §2254. If an answer is filed, petitioner shall have

17

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

18

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, henceforth, petitioner shall serve upon the Attorney

19

General of the State of Nevada a copy of every pleading, motion, or other document he submits for

20

consideration by the court. Petitioner shall include with the original paper submitted for filing a

21

certificate stating the date that a true and correct copy of the document was mailed to the Attorney

22

General. The court may disregard any paper that does not include a certificate of service. After

23

respondents appear in this action, petitioner shall make such service upon the particular Deputy

24

Attorney General assigned to the case.

25

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

26

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

27

attachments that are filed further shall be identified by the number or numbers (or letter or letters) of

28

the exhibits in the attachment. The hard copy of any additional state court record exhibits shall
2

1
2
3

be forwarded – for this case – to the staff attorneys in Reno.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that petitioner’s motion for the appointment of counsel (ECF
No. 1-2) is DENIED.

4
5

DATED this 10th day of August, 2012.

6
7
LARRY R. HICKS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3