Gonzales v. Baker et al

Filing 8

ORDER - ECF No. 6 IFP application granted. Clerk shall file the petition. ECF No. 7 Motion for counsel is granted. FPD is provisionally appointed to represent Petitioner. FPD shall undertake direct representation of Petitione r or to indicate to the Court his inability to represent Petitioner by 7/25/2018. Clerk shall add AG as counsel for Respondents. Clerk shall e-serve both AG and FPD a copy of the petition and a copy of this Order. (E-service on 6/25/2018; copy of Ord er mailed tp P at LCC) AG must enter a notice of appearance by 7/15/2018, but no further response will be required from Respondents until further order of the Court. Paper copies of any electronically filed exhibits need not be provided to chambers or to the staff attorney, unless later directed by the Court. Signed by Judge Miranda M. Du on 6/25/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DRM)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 8 *** 9 DAMIAN MICHAEL GONZALES, Petitioner, 10 Case No. 3:18-cv-00058-MMD-VPC ORDER v. 11 RENEE BAKER, et al., 12 Respondents. 13 14 Petitioner has submitted an application to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 6) 15 and a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The Court finds 16 that Petitioner is unable to pay the filing fee. 17 Petitioner also has submitted a motion for appointment of counsel (ECF No. 7). 18 Petitioner is unable to afford counsel, and the issues presented warrant the appointment 19 of counsel. See 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2)(B). 20 21 22 23 It is therefore ordered that the application to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 6) is granted. Petitioner need not pay the filing fee of five dollars ($5.00). It is further ordered that the Clerk of the Court file the petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. 24 It is further ordered that Petitioner’s motion for appointment of counsel (ECF No. 7) 25 is granted. The Federal Public Defender is provisionally appointed to represent Petitioner. 26 It is further ordered that the Federal Public Defender shall have thirty (30) days from 27 the date that this order is entered to undertake direct representation of Petitioner or to 28 indicate to the Court his inability to represent Petitioner in these proceedings. If the Federal 1 Public Defender does undertake representation of Petitioner, he will then have sixty (60) 2 days to file an amended petition for a writ of habeas corpus. If the Federal Public Defender 3 is unable to represent Petitioner, then the Court shall appoint alternate counsel. 4 It is further ordered that neither the foregoing deadline nor any extension thereof 5 signifies or will signify any implied finding of a basis for tolling during the time period 6 established. Petitioner at all times remains responsible for calculating the running of the 7 federal limitation period under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1) and timely asserting claims. 8 9 It is further ordered that the Clerk of the Court add Adam Paul Laxalt, Attorney General for the State of Nevada, as counsel for Respondents. 10 It is further ordered that the Clerk of the Court electronically serve both the Attorney 11 General of the State of Nevada and the Federal Public Defender a copy of the petition and 12 a copy of this Order. 13 It is further ordered that Respondents’ counsel must enter a notice of appearance 14 within twenty (20) days of entry of this Order, but no further response will be required from 15 Respondents until further order of the Court. 16 It is further ordered that, notwithstanding Local Rule LR IC 2-2(g) paper copies of 17 any electronically filed exhibits need not be provided to chambers or to the staff attorney, 18 unless later directed by the Court. 19 DATED THIS 25th day of June 2018. 20 21 MIRANDA M. DU UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 22 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?