Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cv-00223/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cv-00223-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 535
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus - Death Penalty
Cause of Action: 28:2254 Ptn for Writ of H/C - Stay of Execution

---

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOSEPH MARTIN DANKS,

Petitioner,

v.

VINCE CULLEN, Warden of California State

Prison at San Quentin,

Respondent.

_____________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. 1:11-cv-00223-LJO

DEATH PENALTY CASE

ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR

APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL; DENYING

WITHOUT PREJUDICE REQUEST FOR STAY

OF EXECUTION AND APPLICATION TO

PROCEED WITHOUT PREPAYMENT OF

FEES; AND DEFERRING REQUEST FOR

STATUS CONFERENCE

On February 9, 2011, Petitioner Joseph Martin Danks (“Danks”), a state prisoner facing capital

punishment, commenced this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 by filing an application for appointment of

counsel, request for a stay of execution, and request for a status conference. Appended with this filing is an

application to proceed without prepayment of fees pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. The applications and

requests are supported by the declaration of Habeas Corpus Resource Center (“HCRC”) attorney Gary D.

Sowards, appearing specially for Danks, and an Inmate Statement Report through December 24, 2010 from

San Quentin State Prison. 

I. Request for Appointment of Counsel

Section 3599(a)(2) of Title 18 of the United States Code provides for the appointment of one of more

attorneys to represent an indigent person proceeding under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 to vacate a death sentence. Rule

191(c) of the Local Rules of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California also

provides for the appointment of counsel for indigent capital habeas petitioners. Under this rule, selection of

counsel is made from a panel of attorneys qualified for appointment in death penalty cases and certified by

a selection board appointed by the Chief Judge. Danks requests that the HCRC, which represented him before

11dp223.1stOrd.Dnk.wpd 1

Case 1:11-cv-00223-JLT Document 3 Filed 02/10/11 Page 1 of 3
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

the California Supreme Court on state habeas, be appointed to represent him in these federal proceedings. 

Danks is entitled to appointment of counsel under 18 U.S.C. § 3599(a)(2).

II. Request for Stay of Execution

Local Rule 191(g)(1) provides that when an indigent, condemned habeas petitioner submits an

application for appointment of counsel and a temporary stay of execution, the Court may issue a temporary

stay of execution for a period of 90 days, while counsel is located. Danks has presented no facts or

circumstances that would warrant the exercise of discretion to issue a temporary stay of execution in this case.

III. Request for a Status Conference

Danks requests a status conference to establish a due date for the filing of his petition, the answer of

Respondent Vince Cullen, As Warden of San Quentin State Prison (the “Warden”), and his traverse. 

Once counsel is appointed, the Court will set a case management conference for Phase I of the

litigation at which both Danks and the Warden will appear to discuss filing deadlines, lodging of the record,

and review of the record. Prior to that conference, the Court will request counsel for both parties to complete

case evaluation forms and for Danks’ attorneys to submit a case management plan and budget. Until then,

both Danks and the Warden are encouraged to review the Fresno Attorney Guide to Case Management and

Budgeting in Capital Habeas Cases in four phases. This document is available on the Court’s webpage under

Attorney Info, Forms, CJA. The parties also are encouraged to review amended Local Rule 191, effective

February 8, 2011.

IV. Application for Leave to Proceed in Forma Pauperis

Rule 3(a) of the Rules Governing § 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts provides that a

petitioner seeking in forma pauperis status shall file an affidavit of assets as required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915.

Rule 3(a) also requires a certificate from the prison stating the amount on deposit in the petitioner’s accounts. 

While Danks’ Application to Proceed without Prepayment of Fees asserts his indigence, under penalty of

perjury, and he includes an Inmate Statement Report with his submission, he has not provided the Court with

a certificate from the prison stating the amount on deposit in his inmate account. The Inmate Statement

Report is not certified by a prison official. Although Local Rule 191(e) does not require a filing fee for death

penalty cases filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, the application for in forma pauperis should be presented

properly before the Court confers that status on Danks.

11dp223.1stOrd.Dnk.wpd 2

Case 1:11-cv-00223-JLT Document 3 Filed 02/10/11 Page 2 of 3
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

Good cause appearing therefor,

1. Danks’ application for appointment of counsel is granted. The matter is referred to the

Selection Board for the Eastern District of California to certify an attorney or attorneys qualified and available

to represent Danks before this Court.

2. Danks’ request for a stay of execution is denied without prejudice.

3. Danks’ request for a status conference is deferred.

4. Danks’ application to proceed in forma pauperis is denied without prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED

 

Dated: February 10, 2011 

 /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill 

Lawrence J. O’Neill

 United States District Judge

11dp223.1stOrd.Dnk.wpd 3

Case 1:11-cv-00223-JLT Document 3 Filed 02/10/11 Page 3 of 3