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)

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