Morris v. Baker et al

Filing 17

ORDER denying 6 Motion for Appointment of Counsel. Petitioner's reply to the answer due within 45 days (by 3/21/2015). Signed by Judge Larry R. Hicks on 2/3/2015. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KR)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA

7
8
9

BRENT MORRIS,

10

Petitioner,

11

vs.

12

Case No. 3:14-cv-000372-LRH-WGC

RENEE BAKER, et al.,

13

ORDER

Respondents.

14
This action is a pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254

15
16

by a Nevada state prisoner.

17

Petitioner has filed a motion for the appointment of counsel. (ECF No. 6). Pursuant to 18

18

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

19

the “interests of justice” require representation. There is no constitutional right to appointed counsel

20

for a federal habeas corpus proceeding. Pennsylvania v. Finley, 481 U.S. 551, 555 (1987); Bonin v.

21

Vasquez, 999 F.2d 425, 428 (9th Cir. 1993). The decision to appoint counsel is generally

22

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

23

(1987); Bashor v. Risley, 730 F.2d 1228, 1234 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 838 (1984). The

24

petition on file in this action is well-written and sufficiently clear in presenting the issues that

25

petitioner wishes to bring. The issues in this case are not complex. Counsel is not justified in this

26

instance.

27

///

28

///

1

On January 29, 2015, respondents filed an answer and exhibits, and served the same on

2

petitioner. (ECF Nos. 11-16). If petitioner wishes to file a reply to the answer, he shall do so within

3

45 days from the date of entry of this order.

4
5
6

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that petitioner’s motion for the appointment of counsel
(ECF No. 6) is DENIED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, if petitioner wishes to file a reply to the answer, he

7

shall do so within forty-five (45) days from the date of entry of this order. Thereafter, this matter

8

will be submitted for decision.

9
10

DATED this 3rd day of February, 2015.

11
12

LARRY R. HICKS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2-