(HC) Verdugo v. Pfeiffer ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 GABRIEL VERDUGO, Case No. 1:22-cv-00454-HBK 12 Petitioner, ORDER DENYING PETITIONER’S MOTION FOR EVIDENTIARY HEARING 13 v. ORDER DENYING APPOINTMENT OF 14 CHRISTIAN PFEIFFER, WARDEN, COUNSEL 15 Respondent. (Doc. No. 3) 16 17 18 Before the court is Petitioner’s motion for an evidentiary hearing and motion to appoint 19 counsel. (Doc. No. 3). Petitioner, a state prisoner, has pending a pro se petition for writ of 20 habeas corpus filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. (Doc. No. 1, Petition). Petitioner requests an 21 evidentiary hearing “on all constitutional claims presented in the instant habeas corpus petition,” 22 and further requests appointment of counsel because he is “completely ignorant of the law, and 23 cannot afford to employ professional counsel in order to fully and fairly protect [his] legal 24 interests.” (Doc. No. 3). 25 A. Motion for Evidentiary Hearing 26 Evidentiary hearings are granted only under limited circumstances in habeas proceedings. 27 See 28 U.S.C. § 2254(e)(2)(A)(ii). Petitioner filed the instant motion before Respondent was 28 directed to respond to the Petition. The Court will review the briefing and make findings and 1 || recommendations in due course. If the Court determines that an evidentiary hearing is warranted, 2 | it will schedule one at that time. See Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, R. 8(a). 3 B. Motion for Appointment of Counsel 4 There is no automatic, constitutional right to counsel in federal habeas proceedings. See 5 || Coleman v. Thompson, 501 U.S. 722, 752 (1991); Anderson v. Heinze, 258 F.2d 479, 481 (9th 6 | Cir. 1958). The Criminal Justice Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3006A, however, authorizes this court to 7 | appoint counsel for a financially eligible person who seeks relief under § 2241 when the “court 8 || determines that the interests of Justice so require.” Id. at § 3006A(a)(2)(B); see also Chaney v. 9 | Lewis, 801 F.2d 1191, 1196 (9th Cir. 1986). Moreover, the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases 10 | in the United States District Courts require the court to appoint counsel: (1) when the court has 11 | authorized discovery upon a showing of good cause and appointment of counsel is necessary for 12 | effective discovery; or (2) when the court has determined that an evidentiary hearing is warranted. 13 | Id. at Rs. 6(a) and 8(c). 14 Based upon the record, the Court finds Petitioner has not demonstrated that appointment 15 || of counsel is necessary. Petitioner was able to file his habeas petition without the aid of counsel, 16 | and the Court finds that the claims raised therein do not appear to be complex. Further, the Court 17 | does not find the circumstances of this case indicate that appointed counsel is necessary to 18 || prevent due process violations. Provided Petitioner meets the criteria set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 19 | 3006A, the Court will consider appointing counsel to represent Petitioner if, after reviewing the 20 | record in further detail, the Court later finds good cause to permit discovery or decides that an 21 | evidentiary hearing is warranted in this matter. 22 Accordingly, it is ORDERED: 23 Petitioner’s motion for an evidentiary hearing and for appointment of counsel (Doc. No. 24 3) is DENIED without prejudice. | Dated: _ April 25,2022 Mile. Wh fareh fackte 6 HELENA M. BARCH-KUCHTA 4 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 28 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28