IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
March 17, 2010
TERRENCE BROWNLEE, PETITIONER,
BUREAU OF PRISONS, ET AL., RESPONDENTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Craig M. Kellison United States Magistrate Judge
Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Pending before the court are: (1) petitioner's amended petitions (Docs. 14 and 17): (2) petitioner's motions for appointment of counsel (Docs. 15 and 20); and (3) petitioner's "Motion to be Heard" (Doc. 19).
The action was commenced with a petition filed on September 1, 2009 (Doc. 1), apparently challenging the denial of parole. That petition failed to name the correct respondent and was dismissed with leave to amend. On October 26, 2009, petitioner filed an amended petition (Doc. 14), also apparently challenging the denial of parole. On February 16, 2010, petitioner filed a second amended petition (Doc. 17), which appears to challenge a 1980 conviction from the Fresno County Superior Court. Given petitioner's filings, it is unclear whether he intends through this action to challenge the denial of parole or his underlying conviction. Petitioner will be provided an opportunity to elect to proceed on either the October 2009 amended petition or the February 2010 amended petition. Petitioner is cautioned that failure to notify the court of his election within the time provided may result in dismissal of the entire action. See Local Rule 110.
Petitioner seeks the appointment of counsel. Given that it is unclear what claims petitioner is raising, the court finds that it would be inappropriate to consider the appointment of counsel at this time. Petitioner's motions will be denied without prejudice to renewal at a later date.
Finally, petitioner appears to seek a court hearing on his claims. Petitioner is advised that typically habeas corpus matters are decided without an in-court hearing. On appropriate motion and for good cause shown, the court may conduct an evidentiary hearing. In the meantime, petitioner's "Motion to be Heard" will be denied.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Petitioner's motion for appointment of counsel (Docs. 15 and 20) are denied;
2. Petitioner's "Motion to be Heard" (Doc. 19) is denied; and
3. Within 30 days of the date of this order, petitioner shall inform the court whether he intends to proceed on the October 2009 amended petition or February 2010 amended petition.
© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.