LEON v. BARNES, 2:12-cv-2559 JAM GGH. (2015)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20150610a83
Visitors: 6
Filed: Jun. 09, 2015
Latest Update: Jun. 09, 2015
Summary: ORDER GREGORY G. HOLLOWS , Magistrate Judge . Introduction and Summary Petitioner has filed a motion for discovery involving his case file, and a motion for appointed counsel. For the reasons set forth below, both motions are denied. Motion for Discovery One of the issues in this habeas claim involves an allegation that counsel failed to pass along a plea offer of 21 years, i.e. one without a "life tail." Petitioner believes (or believed) that he can prove the existence of such a plea
Summary: ORDER GREGORY G. HOLLOWS , Magistrate Judge . Introduction and Summary Petitioner has filed a motion for discovery involving his case file, and a motion for appointed counsel. For the reasons set forth below, both motions are denied. Motion for Discovery One of the issues in this habeas claim involves an allegation that counsel failed to pass along a plea offer of 21 years, i.e. one without a "life tail." Petitioner believes (or believed) that he can prove the existence of such a plea ..
More
ORDER
GREGORY G. HOLLOWS, Magistrate Judge.
Introduction and Summary
Petitioner has filed a motion for discovery involving his case file, and a motion for appointed counsel. For the reasons set forth below, both motions are denied.
Motion for Discovery
One of the issues in this habeas claim involves an allegation that counsel failed to pass along a plea offer of 21 years, i.e. one without a "life tail." Petitioner believes (or believed) that he can prove the existence of such a plea offer if only his trial file were returned to him. If the issue here was, in fact, that petitioner had not received his case file from his prior attorney, the undersigned would order counsel in possession of such files to remit the defense file to him. However, after filing the motion and reply to the opposition, petitioner received his file on account of a State Bar inquiry. The entire file was given to petitioner, absent redaction of some witness personal information. See ECF No. 32 at 13 (electroninc pagination). The undersigned considers the discovery matter, ECF No. 21 denied as moot.
Petitioner has also requested the appointment of counsel. That request, ECF No. 32 is denied without prejudice if the court determines at a later time that an evidentiary hearing is necessary.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
