Mathis v. Warden N.N.C.C.

Filing 8

ORDER - It is therefore ordered that the Clerk of Court is instructed to add Nevada Attorney General Aaron D. Ford as counsel for Respondents and electronically serve the Nevada Attorney General with a copy of the petition (ECF No. 6 ) and this orde r. (AG Ford added; Petition ECF No 6 attached hereto for AG.) It is further ordered that this Court will provisionally appoint the Federal Public Defender to represent Mathis in 30 days unless Mathis declares his desire that this Cour t not appoint counsel. (Notice of Compliance is due by 9/1/2022.) It is further ordered that prior to the appointment of counsel, if Mathis desires the appointment of counsel, Mathis must file an application for leave to proceed IFP, accompani ed by a signed financial certificate and a statement of his inmate account. The clerk of the court is directed to send Mathis a blank application form for incarcerated litigants. (Inmate IFP packet attached hereto for distribution to P via NNCC La w Library.) It is further ordered that this Court will set a briefing schedule following the appointment of counsel or the filing of Mathiss declaration that counsel is not desired. Signed by District Judge Anne R. Traum on 8/2/2022. (Attachments: # 1 Petition ECF No. 6 , # 2 Inmate IFP packet)(Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - CJD)

Case 3:22-cv-00091-ART-CLB Document 8 Filed 08/02/22 Page 1 of 3

1
2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

3

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

4

JASON T. MATHIS,

5
6

Respondents.

9

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

ORDER

WARDEN, N.N.C.C., et al.,

8

11

Petitioner,

v.

7

10

Case No. 3:22-cv-00091-ART-CLB

Pro se Petitioner Jason T. Mathis has filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas
Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. (ECF No. 6 (“Petition”).) This matter comes before
the court on initial review under the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases
(“Habeas Rules”). For the reasons discussed below, the court directs service of
the Petition.
Mathis challenges a conviction and sentence imposed by the Eighth
Judicial District Court for Clark County (“state court”). State of Nevada v. Jason
T. Mathis, Case No. 05C216498-1. 1 On October 8, 2008, the state court entered
a judgment of conviction, pursuant to a jury trial, for two counts of first-degree
murder with the use of a deadly weapon and one count of conspiracy to commit
murder. In total, it appears that Mathis was sentenced to four terms of life
without the possibility of parole. Mathis appealed, and the Nevada Supreme
Court affirmed on June 30, 2011. Remittitur issued on July 25, 2011.
On February 3, 2012, Mathis filed a state petition for writ of habeas corpus.
The state court denied post-conviction relief on July 9, 2019. Mathis filed a postconviction appeal, and the Nevada Supreme Court affirmed the denial on
November 13, 2020. Remittitur issued on December 8, 2020.
The court takes judicial notice of the online docket records of the Eighth Judicial District Court and Nevada appellate
courts.
The
docket
records
may
be
accessed
by
the
public
online
at:
https://www.clarkcountycourts.us/Anonymous/default.aspx and
http://caseinfo nvsupremecourt.us/public/caseSearch.do.
1

1

Case 3:22-cv-00091-ART-CLB Document 8 Filed 08/02/22 Page 2 of 3

1

On February 14, 2022, Mathis initiated this federal habeas corpus

2

proceeding by filing a motion for extension of time to file a petition for a writ of

3

habeas corpus. (ECF No. 1-1.) This Court instructed Mathis to resolve the filing

4

fee, denied his motion without prejudice as premature, and instructed Mathis to

5

file a petition for a writ of habeas corpus. (ECF No. 4.) Mathis complied by paying

6

the filing fee and filing a petition. (ECF Nos. 6, 7.)

7

Habeas Rule 4 requires the assigned judge to examine the habeas petition

8

and order a response unless it “plainly appears” that the petition is not entitled

9

to relief. See Valdez v. Montgomery, 918 F.3d 687, 693 (9th Cir. 2019). This rule

10

allows courts to screen and dismiss petitions that are patently frivolous, vague,

11

conclusory, palpably incredible, false, or plagued by procedural defects. Boyd v.

12

Thompson, 147 F.3d 1124, 1128 (9th Cir. 1998); Hendricks v. Vasquez, 908 F.2d

13

490, 491 (9th Cir. 1990) (collecting cases). Although it appears that Mathis’s

14

petition may have a statute of limitations issue, 2 the Court finds that a response

15

is warranted in the instant case.

16

Further, it appears that counsel may be helpful in this case, given the

17

potential complexity of Mathis’s claims and his life sentences. The Criminal

18

Justice Act (“CJA”), 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2), authorizes the court to appoint

19

counsel “when the interests of justice so require.” The CJA further provides that

20

a habeas petitioner must demonstrate financial eligibility in all circumstances

21

where the court appoints counsel. See id. § 3006A(a) (counsel “shall be provided

22

for any financially eligible person”) (emphasis added).

23

Although this Court finds that the appointment of counsel is in the

24

interests of justice, this Court is cognizant of the fact that Mathis has not moved

25

for the appointment of counsel. As such, this Court intends to provisionally

26

appoint the Federal Public Defender to represent Mathis in 30 days unless Mathis

27
28

Absent another basis for tolling or delayed accrual, the Court notes—but does not decide—that it appears that Mathis
filed his petition 343 days after the AEDPA limitation period expired.

2

2

Case 3:22-cv-00091-ART-CLB Document 8 Filed 08/02/22 Page 3 of 3

1

declares his desire that this Court not appoint counsel. Moreover, if Mathis

2

desires that counsel be appointed, he must file a complete in forma pauperis

3

(“IFP”) application to show that he cannot afford counsel to litigate this case.

4

It is therefore ordered that the Clerk of Court is instructed to add Nevada

5

Attorney General Aaron D. Ford as counsel for Respondents and electronically

6

serve the Nevada Attorney General with a copy of the petition (ECF No. 6) and

7

this order.

8

It is further ordered that this Court will provisionally appoint the Federal

9

Public Defender to represent Mathis in 30 days unless Mathis declares his desire

10

that this Court not appoint counsel.

11

It is further ordered that prior to the appointment of counsel, if Mathis

12

desires the appointment of counsel, Mathis must file an application for leave to

13

proceed IFP, accompanied by a signed financial certificate and a statement of his

14

inmate account. The clerk of the court is directed to send Mathis a blank

15

application form for incarcerated litigants.

16

It is further ordered that this Court will set a briefing schedule following

17

the appointment of counsel or the filing of Mathis’s declaration that counsel is

18

not desired.

19

DATED THIS 2nd day of August 2022.

20
21
22
23

ANNE R. TRAUM
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

24
25
26
27
28

3