Amaya v. Frauenheim, 16-cv-05069-PJH. (2018)
Court: District Court, N.D. California
Number: infdco20181005a67
Visitors: 24
Filed: Oct. 04, 2018
Latest Update: Oct. 04, 2018
Summary: ORDER DENYING MOTION TO APPOINT COUNSEL Re: Dkt. No. 33 Re: Dkt. No. 33 PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON , District Judge . Petitioner, a California prisoner, filed a pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2254. The petition was dismissed on the merits and the case was closed. Petitioner has filed a motion to appoint counsel. The Sixth Amendment's right to counsel does not apply in habeas corpus actions. Knaubert v. Goldsmith, 791 F.2d 722 , 728 (9th Cir. 1986). However
Summary: ORDER DENYING MOTION TO APPOINT COUNSEL Re: Dkt. No. 33 Re: Dkt. No. 33 PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON , District Judge . Petitioner, a California prisoner, filed a pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2254. The petition was dismissed on the merits and the case was closed. Petitioner has filed a motion to appoint counsel. The Sixth Amendment's right to counsel does not apply in habeas corpus actions. Knaubert v. Goldsmith, 791 F.2d 722 , 728 (9th Cir. 1986). However,..
More
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO APPOINT COUNSEL Re: Dkt. No. 33
Re: Dkt. No. 33
PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON, District Judge.
Petitioner, a California prisoner, filed a pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The petition was dismissed on the merits and the case was closed. Petitioner has filed a motion to appoint counsel.
The Sixth Amendment's right to counsel does not apply in habeas corpus actions. Knaubert v. Goldsmith, 791 F.2d 722, 728 (9th Cir. 1986). However, 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2)(B) provides that in habeas cases, whenever "the court determines that the interests of justice so require", representation may be provided for any financially eligible person. While petitioner previously argued that he only spoke Spanish, he ably litigated the case. Petitioner previously filed a motion for a stay which was granted, and the case was stayed while petitioner exhausted additional claims in state court. Once the claims were exhausted, the stay was lifted, and petitioner filed an amended petition with all of his claims. Petitioner presented his claims adequately, and they were not particularly complex. The interests of justice do not require the appointment of counsel. The motion to appoint counsel (Docket No. 33) is DENIED.
If petitioner appeals the denial of the petition, he may file a motion to appoint counsel with the Ninth Circuit.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
