Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-00173/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-00173-0/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)

---

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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOHN CLAYTON DUNHAM,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-07-0173 DFL DAD P

vs.

D.K. SISTO, et al.,

Respondents. ORDER

 /

Petitioner, a state prisoner 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 and a motion for appointment of counsel.

Examination of petitioner’s 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 violations of constitutional

rights are proved, respondents will be directed to file a response to petitioner’s habeas petition.

Petitioner is informed that 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). 

Counsel may be appointed at any stage of the case “if the interests of justice so require.” 18

Case 2:07-cv-00173-MJP Document 5 Filed 02/05/07 Page 1 of 2
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

2

U.S.C. § 3006A. See also Rule 8(c), Fed. R. Governing § 2254 Cases. In the present case, the

court does not find that the interests of justice require appointment of counsel.

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Petitioner’s January 29, 2007 application to proceed in forma pauperis is

granted;

2. Petitioner’s January 29, 2007 motion for appointment of counsel is denied;

3. Respondents are directed to file a response to petitioner’s habeas petition

within thirty 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;

4. If the response to the habeas petition is an answer, petitioner’s reply, if any,

shall be filed and served within thirty days after the answer is served;

5. 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 the

motion is served, and respondents’ reply, if any, shall be filed and served within fifteen days

thereafter; and

6. The Clerk of the Court shall serve a copy of this order together with a copy of

the petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 on Michael Patrick Farrell, 

Senior Assistant Attorney General.

DATED: February 5, 2007.

DAD:13

dunh0173.100+110

Case 2:07-cv-00173-MJP Document 5 Filed 02/05/07 Page 2 of 2