Rosky v. Byrne et al
ORDER appointing counsel, provisionally appointing FPD to represent Petitioner; giving FPD 30 days to undertake direct representation or indicate its inability to do so; directing Clerk to send copy of this order to FPD and CJA Coordinator (NE Fs sent 1/10/2018); denying without prejudice ECF No. 16 Motion to Dismiss; denying ECF Nos. 32 Motion for Summary Judgment and 35 "Motion Noticing the Court that Petitioner Vehemently Objects Respondents' Intention to Violate his Due Process Rights." Signed by Judge Miranda M. Du on 1/10/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KR)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
JOHN H. ROSKY,
Case No. 3:16-cv-00156-MMD-VPC
QUENTIN BYRNE, et al.,
This is a pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254,
filed by a Nevada state prisoner. Currently pending before the Court are several motions,
including the respondents’ motion to dismiss the petition as untimely. In opposition,
petitioner has argued, among other things, that his petition should be considered timely
pursuant to Schlup v. Delo, 513 U.S. 298 (1995) because he is actually innocent.
Under 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2)(B), the court may appoint counsel for a petitioner
seeking relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 if the petitioner is financially eligible and the court
determines that the interests of justice require appointment of counsel. In light of the
issues presented in connection with petitioner’s gateway claim of actual innocence, the
Court believes that appointment of counsel in this matter is in the interests of justice. The
Court takes judicial notice of an application to proceed in forma pauperis filed by petitioner
with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals (Docket No. 17-72652) and concludes based
thereon that petitioner is financially eligible for appointment of counsel.
Accordingly, it is hereby ordered that counsel is appointed to represent petitioner
in all federal proceedings related to this matter, including any appeals or certiorari
proceedings, unless allowed to withdraw.
It is further ordered that the Federal Public Defender will be provisionally appointed
as counsel and will have thirty (30) days to undertake direct representation of petitioner
or to indicate to the Court the office's inability to represent petitioner in these proceedings.
If the Federal Public Defender is unable to represent petitioner, the Court then will appoint
It is further ordered that the Clerk send a copy of this order to the Federal Public
Defender and the CJA Coordinator for this division.
It is further ordered that the pending motion to dismiss (ECF No. 16) is denied
without prejudice. A deadline for filing an amended petition, or, if none, for respondents
to renew their motion to dismiss will be set after counsel has entered an appearance.
It is further ordered that petitioner’s motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 32)
and “Motion Noticing the Court that Petitioner Vehemently Objects Respondents’
Intention to Violate his Due Process Rights” (ECF No. 35) are denied. Respondents will
have the opportunity to file an answer addressing all of the petitioner’s claims after the
Court decides any motion to dismiss, and the merits of the petition will not be considered
by the Court until the answer and any reply thereto have been filed. Respondents’ intent
to file an answer after any motion to dismiss does not violate the petitioner’s due process
DATED THIS 10th day of January 2018.
MIRANDA M. DU
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?