Mkhitaryan v. County of Clark ( 2024 )

1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 5 6 SERGEY MKHITARYAN, Case No. 2:24-cv-00708-RFB-NJK 7 Plaintiff(s), Order 8 v. [Docket Nos. 2, 3, 7] 9 COUNTY OF CLARK, 10 Defendant(s). 11 Plaintiff filed a notice of incompetency. See Docket No. 2.1 12 Upon a finding of incompetence, courts are empowered to appoint a guardian ad litem or 13 to “issue another appropriate order.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 17(c). The Ninth Circuit has identified the 14 appointment of a lawyer as a potential remedy that is sufficient in appropriate cases to protect an 15 incompetent litigant’s interests. Davis v. Walker, 745 F.3d 1303, at 1311 (9th Cir. 2014) (citing 16 Krain v. Smallwood, 880 F.2d 1119, 1121 (9th Cir. 1989)). In district courts, the appointment of 17 counsel for persons financially unable to obtain representation in criminal cases is governed by 18 18 U.S.C. § 3006A. “A person for whom counsel is appointed shall be represented at every stage of 19 the proceedings from his initial appearance before the United States magistrate judge or the court 20 through appeal, including ancillary matters appropriate to the proceedings.” 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(c). 21 Ancillary matters include proceedings sufficiently related to the underlying criminal case. See 22 United States v. Martinson, 809 F.2d 1364, 1370 (9th Cir. 1987). Even when proceedings do not 23 constitute an ancillary matter, appointment of counsel is still proper where exceptional 24 circumstances exist. See Agyeman v. Corrections Corp. of Am., 390 F.3d 1101, 1104 (9th Cir. 25 2004) (allowing court appointment of an attorney to represent a plaintiff in a civil action when 26 exceptional circumstances exist). The existence of exceptional circumstances entails an analysis 27 1 The notice references Plaintiff’s “competency,” but read in context is construed as a 28 notice of incompetency. 1} of the “likelihood of the plaintiff's success on the merits and an evaluation of the plaintiffs ability 2|| to articulate his claims in light of the complexity of the legal issues involved.” /d. (internal citation 3], omitted). 4 Plaintiff is an inmate in state custody awaiting trial on murder charges. See State of Nev. 5| v. Mkhitaryan, C-16-312769-1 (Eighth Judicial Dist. Ct.); State of Nev. v. Mkhitaryan, C-16- 6] 312718-1 (Eighth Judicial Dist. Ct.); see also Trigueros v. Adams, 658 F.3d 983, 987 (9th Cir. 7| 2011) (taking judicial notice of state court proceedings). The Court has elsewhere recognized a 8|| finding of Plaintiff's incompetency. See, e.g., Mkhitaryan v. Las Vegas Metro. Police Dept., No. 2:20-cv-02169-ART-NJK, Docket No. 30 at 2 (D. Nev. Apr. 20, 2022) (citing finding of 10] incompetency in relation to state court proceedings). Although not entirely clear, Plaintiff brings 11] this case in relation to his pretrial detention and those criminal proceedings. See Docket No. 1-1. 12|| Given the circumstances of this case, the Court finds it appropriate to appoint counsel to represent 13] Plaintiff. 14 Accordingly, Plaintiff's motion for appointment of counsel (Docket No. 2) is hereby 15] GRANTED. The Court APPOINTS the Federal Public Defender to represent Plaintiff in this 16] matter. The Court INSTRUCTS the Clerk’s Office to add the Federal Public Defender’s Office to the service list in this matter and, further, to separately send this order to the Federal Public 18] Defender’s Office so that representation may begin immediately. In addition, Plaintiffs other 19] pending motions (Docket Nos. 3, 7) are DENIED without prejudice. 20 IT IS SO ORDERED. 21 Dated: August 30, 2024 LZ Nancy J. Koppes \, 23 United States Magistrate Judge 24 25 26 27 28