Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Gonzales v. Dickinson

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


March 17, 2010

EDWARD STEPHEN GONZALES, PETITIONER,
v.
KATHLEEN DICKINSON, RESPONDENT.

ORDER

Petitioner, a state prisoner at the California Medical Facility and who is proceeding pro se, has filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, together with an application to proceed in forma pauperis. This case was transferred to this court from the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California - Western Division.

Examination of the in forma pauperis application reveals that petitioner is unable to afford the costs of suit. Accordingly, the application to proceed in forma pauperis will be granted. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a).

Since petitioner may be entitled to relief if the claimed violation of constitutional rights is proved, respondent will be directed to file a response to petitioner's habeas petition.

Petitioner has also requested the appointment of counsel. There currently exists no absolute right to appointment of counsel in habeas proceedings. See Nevius v. Sumner, 105 F.3d 453, 460 (9th Cir. 1996). However, 18 U.S.C. § 3006A authorizes the appointment of counsel at any stage of the case "if the interests of justice so require." See Rule 8(c), Fed. R. Governing § 2254 Cases. In the present case, the court does not find that the interests of justice would be served by the appointment of counsel at the present time.

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. Petitioner's application to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. No. 1 at 9-10), is granted;

2. Respondent is directed to file a response to petitioner's habeas petition within sixty days from the date of this order. See Rule 4, Fed. R. Governing § 2254 Cases. An answer shall be accompanied by all transcripts and other documents relevant to the issues presented in the petition. See Rule 5, Fed. R. Governing § 2254 Cases;

3. If the response to the habeas petition is an answer, petitioner's reply, if any, shall be filed and served within thirty days after service of the answer;

4. If the response to the habeas petition is a motion, petitioner's opposition or statement of non-opposition to the motion shall be filed and served within thirty days after service of the motion, and respondent's reply, if any, shall be filed and served within fourteen days thereafter;

5. Petitioner's February 12, 2010 request for appointment of counsel (doc. No. 3) is denied without prejudice; and

6. The Clerk of the Court shall serve a copy of this order, a copy of the petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Doc. Nos. 1 & 2), and the court's form regarding consent or request for reassignment on Jennifer A. Neill, Supervising Deputy Attorney General.

20100317

© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.