Collins v. State of Nevada et al

Filing 11

ORDER directing Clerk to file, and denying, ECF No. 1 -3 Motion for Appointment of Counsel; directing Clerk to file and e-serve ECF No. 1 -1 Petition on Respondents (NV AG added, NEF sent 5/31/2017), giving Respondents 45 days to answer. R eply due within 45 days thereafter. Any exhibits to be filed with separate index. Hard copies of any exhibits to be forwarded, for this case, to staff attorneys in Reno. Signed by Judge Miranda M. Du on 5/31/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KR)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 8 *** 9 MARK COLLINS, 10 11 12 Case No. 3:16-cv-00433-MMD-VPC Petitioner, ORDER v. STATE OF NEVADA, et al., Respondents. 13 14 This action is a pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 15 U.S.C. § 2254 by a Nevada state prisoner. Petitioner has paid the filing fee for this action. 16 (ECF No. 10). The Court has reviewed the habeas petition, and it will be served on 17 respondents. 18 Along with the petition, petitioner filed a motion for the appointment of counsel. 19 (ECF No. 1-3). Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(2)(B), the district court has discretion to 20 appoint counsel when it determines that the “interests of justice” require representation in 21 a habeas corpus case. Petitioner has no constitutional right to appointed counsel in a 22 federal habeas corpus proceeding. Pennsylvania v. Finley, 481 U.S. 551, 555 (1987); 23 Bonin v. Vasquez, 999 F.2d 425, 428 (9th Cir. 1993). The decision to appoint counsel is 24 within the Court’s discretion. Chaney v. Lewis, 801 F.2d 1191, 1196 (9th Cir. 1986), cert. 25 denied, 481 U.S. 1023 (1987); Bashor v. Risley, 730 F.2d 1228, 1234 (9th Cir.), cert. 26 denied, 469 U.S. 838 (1984). In this case, the petition on file is sufficiently clear in 27 presenting the issues that petitioner wishes to bring. The appointment of counsel is not 28 justified in this instance. The motion is denied. 1 It is therefore ordered that the Clerk of Court file petitioner’s motion for the 2 appointment of counsel (ECF No. 1-3). The motion for appointment of counsel is denied. 3 It is further ordered that the Clerk of Court file and electronically serve the petition 4 5 6 upon the respondents. It is further ordered that the Clerk of Court add Nevada Attorney General Adam Paul Laxalt to the CM/ECF docket sheet as counsel for respondents. 7 It is further ordered that respondents will have forty-five (45) days from the entry 8 of this order within which to answer, or otherwise respond to, the petition. In their answer 9 or other response, respondents must address all claims presented in the petition. 10 Respondents must raise all potential affirmative defenses in the initial responsive 11 pleading, including lack of exhaustion and procedural default. Successive motions to 12 dismiss will not be entertained. If an answer is filed, respondents must comply with the 13 requirements of Rule 5 of the Rules Governing Proceedings in the United States District 14 Courts under 28 U.S.C. §2254. If an answer is filed, petitioner will have forty-five (45) 15 days from the date of service of the answer to file a reply. 16 It is further ordered that any state court record exhibits filed by respondents must 17 be filed with a separate index of exhibits identifying the exhibits by number or letter. The 18 hard copy of all state court record exhibits will be forwarded, for this case, to the staff 19 attorneys in the Reno Division of the Clerk of Court. 20 DATED THIS 31st day of May 2017. 21 22 MIRANDA M. DU UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

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?