Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Anderson v. Nevin, 2:15-cv-02245-RFB-PAL. (2016)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20160209b12 Visitors: 3
Filed: Feb. 05, 2016
Latest Update: Feb. 05, 2016
Summary: ORDER RICHARD F. BOULWARE, II , District Judge . In this habeas corpus action, initiated on November 25, 2015, by Nevada prisoner Dustin Anderson, the court, on December 11, 2015, granted Anderson leave to proceed in forma pauperis, ordered his habeas petition served on the respondents, and set a deadline — February 9, 2016 — for the respondents to appear and respond to the petition. See Order entered December 11, 2015 (ECF No. 3). In that order, the court also denied Anderson's motion
More

ORDER

In this habeas corpus action, initiated on November 25, 2015, by Nevada prisoner Dustin Anderson, the court, on December 11, 2015, granted Anderson leave to proceed in forma pauperis, ordered his habeas petition served on the respondents, and set a deadline — February 9, 2016 — for the respondents to appear and respond to the petition. See Order entered December 11, 2015 (ECF No. 3). In that order, the court also denied Anderson's motion for appointment of counsel. See id.

On December 31, 2015, Anderson filed a motion for reconsideration (ECF No. 5), requesting reconsideration of the denial of his motion for appointment of counsel.

Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b), the court may relieve a party from an order or judgment for the following reasons: (1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect; (2) newly discovered evidence; (3) fraud, misrepresentation, or other misconduct by an opposing party; (4) the judgment is void; (5) the judgment has been satisfied, released, or discharged, or a prior judgment upon which it is based has been reversed or otherwise vacated, or it is no longer equitable that the judgment should have prospective application; or (6) any other reason justifying relief. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b).

Upon review of the record, the Court finds that it denied the petitioner's request for appointment of counsel inadvertently. The Court had intended to grant the motion for appointment of counsel.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that petitioner's Motion to Reconsider (ECF No. 5) is GRANTED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Federal Public Defenders' Office is appointed to represent the petitioner in this case. A copy of this Order shall be served on the Federal Public Defender in this District by the Clerk of the Court.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer