Filed: Feb. 16, 2018
Latest Update: Feb. 16, 2018
Summary: Order Denying Motions [ECF No. 20, 21, 23] JENNIFER A. DORSEY , District Judge . Pro se petitioner Larry Washington is an inmate at the Southern Desert Correctional Center serving two life sentences for second-degree kidnapping while using a deadly weapon and assault with a deadly weapon. 1 He petitions for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. 2254, 2 and respondents move to dismiss it. 3 Washington requests additional time to respond to the dismissal motion, 4 moves for appointme
Summary: Order Denying Motions [ECF No. 20, 21, 23] JENNIFER A. DORSEY , District Judge . Pro se petitioner Larry Washington is an inmate at the Southern Desert Correctional Center serving two life sentences for second-degree kidnapping while using a deadly weapon and assault with a deadly weapon. 1 He petitions for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. 2254, 2 and respondents move to dismiss it. 3 Washington requests additional time to respond to the dismissal motion, 4 moves for appointmen..
More
Order Denying Motions
[ECF No. 20, 21, 23]
JENNIFER A. DORSEY, District Judge.
Pro se petitioner Larry Washington is an inmate at the Southern Desert Correctional Center serving two life sentences for second-degree kidnapping while using a deadly weapon and assault with a deadly weapon.1 He petitions for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254,2 and respondents move to dismiss it.3 Washington requests additional time to respond to the dismissal motion,4 moves for appointment of counsel,5 and asks me to take judicial notice of more than 100 pages of documents.6
Respondents oppose Washington's request for more time, arguing that he already responded to their dismissal motion.7 Respondents are correct: Washington responded to the dismissal motion in a document entitled "Petitioner's Motion in Opposition To Respondent's [sic] Motion To Dismiss."8 So, his request for more time is moot, and I deny it. I also deny his renewed motion for appointment of counsel because the only new bases that he asserts are that he cannot afford a lawyer, has limited access to the law library, and has an inmate in Nevada is writing his motions for him and mailing them to him in Arizona.9 Since filing his motion, Washington has been transferred back to Nevada, so his third new basis is no longer relevant.10 And as I said in my previous order denying his first motion for appointment of counsel, "[i]t appears that [Washington] has the ability to communicate his issues, which are not so complex that denial of counsel would amount to a denial of due process."11 His renewed motion is therefore denied.
And finally, the documents that Washington wants me to take judicial notice of are argumentative in nature and appear to respond to respondents' dismissal motion.12 Judicial notice is thus inappropriate.13 I will consider these documents, along with the several exhibits that Washington filed,14 when deciding the motion to dismiss.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Washington's renewed motion for appointment of counsel [ECF No. 21] and request for me to take judicial notice [ECF No. 23] are DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Washington's motion for an extension of time [ECF No. 20] is DENIED as moot.
