Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_00-cv-01865/USCOURTS-cand-3_00-cv-01865-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

1

As of this time, petitioner has not chosen to delete any claims. 

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOHNEL M. BAILEY, 

Petitioner,

 v.

ANNE M. RAMIREZ, Warden,

Respondent. ___________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C 00-1865 MMC (PR)

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR

APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL

(Docket No. 98)

On May 24, 2000, petitioner, a California prisoner proceeding pro se, filed the abovetitled petition for a writ of habeas corpus, after which the Court dismissed the action as

untimely and petitioner appealed. On remand from the Ninth Circuit, the Court, on June 17

2003, issued an Order to Show Cause, and, in accordance therewith, respondent filed an

answer accompanied by a supporting memorandum and exhibits, and petitioner filed a

traverse. Petitioner thereafter retained private counsel, who, on December 23, 2005, filed a

motion to amend the petition. By order filed February 27, 2006, the Court denied the motion

to the extent petitioner sought to plead additional claims and granted the motion to the extent

petitioner sought leave to delete claims on which he no longer wished to proceed.1

 On April

20, 2006, the Court granted petitioner’s request to remove his attorney as counsel of record. 

Now before the Court is petitioner’s motion for appointment of counsel, filed May 30, 2006. 

Case 3:00-cv-01865-MMC Document 101 Filed 06/13/06 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

2

The Sixth Amendment's right to counsel does not apply in habeas corpus actions. 

Knaubert v. Goldsmith, 791 F.2d 722, 728 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 867 (1986). 

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2)(B), however, a district court is authorized to appoint

counsel to represent a habeas petitioner whenever "the court determines that the interests of

justice so require and such person is financially unable to obtain representation." To date,

petitioner’s claims have been adequately presented in his petition, traverse, and state

appellate court briefs. Those claims are under submission to the Court, and there are no

further documents petitioner is required to file. If, after reviewing the papers submitted by

the parties, the Court finds that counsel and/or an evidentiary hearing is necessary, the Court

will issue an appropriate order sua sponte. 

Accordingly, the request for appointment of counsel is hereby DENIED. 

This order terminates Docket No. 98.

 IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: June 13, 2006 _________________________

MAXINE M. CHESNEY

United States District Judge

Case 3:00-cv-01865-MMC Document 101 Filed 06/13/06 Page 2 of 2