Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_08-cv-02226/USCOURTS-azd-2_08-cv-02226-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)

---

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

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Fortino Alvarez,

Petitioner, 

vs.

Rebecca Kristo, Acting Chief

Administrator, Gila River Indian

Community Department of

Rehabilitation and Supervision, 

Respondent.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CV-08-2226-PHX-DGC (DKD)

ORDER

Petitioner Fortino Alvarez is an inmate of the Gila River Indian Community

Department of Rehabilitation and Supervision. On December 5, 2008, Petitioner filed a

petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 25 U.S.C. § 1303 and 28 U.S.C. § 2241.

Dkt. #1. The petition asserts, among other things, that Petitioner was denied due process, the

right to counsel, and the right to a jury trial. Id.

Petitioner filed a motion for appointment of counsel. Dkt. #3. Because Petitioner’s

claims were well presented, the Court concluded that appointed counsel was not warranted

and denied Petitioner’s motion. Dkt. #4. Petitioner then filed a motion for reconsideration.

Dkt. #5. Concluding that Petitioner had not made the showing necessary to warrant

reconsideration, the Court denied the motion. Dkt. #8. 

The Court has received a letter from Daniel Kaplan, an attorney with the office of the

Federal Public Defender for the District of Arizona. Dkt. #11. Mr. Kaplan explains that his

office assisted Petitioner in drafting the petition and that issues raised by the petition are of

Case 2:08-cv-02226-DGC Document 14 Filed 03/04/09 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

27

28

- 2 -

some significance in the federal courts and have not reached the appellate level. Id.

Mr. Kaplan asks that his office be appointed to represent Petitioner. Id. 

In light of Mr. Kaplan’s letter, the Court concluded that additional consideration of

Petitioner’s request for appointment of counsel was warranted. A hearing was held on

February 27, 2009, to determine whether the Court should appoint the office of the Federal

Public Defender to represent Petitioner. Dkt. #13. Among other facts, the Court has learned

that Petitioner is serving a prison term of up to five years, that he was not represented by

counsel at the trial level, and that the tribal facility in which he is incarcerated has no law

library or other form of legal assistance. The Court concludes that the interests of justice

require that the Federal Public Defender be appointed to represent Petitioner in this matter.

18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2)(B) (whenever “the court determines that the interests of justice so

require, representation may be provided for any financially eligible person who . . . is seeking

relief under section 2241”); Chaney v. Lewis, 801 F.2d 1191, 1196 (9th Cir. 1986); see also

28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1) (“The court may request an attorney to represent any person unable

to afford counsel.”); Wilborn v. Escalderon, 789 F.2d 1328, 1331 (9th Cir. 1986).

IT IS ORDERED:

1. The Federal Public Defender is appointed to represent Petitioner in this matter.

2. The orders denying Petitioner’s motion for appointment of counsel (Dkt. #4)

and motion for reconsideration (Dkt. #8) are vacated. 

DATED this 3rd day of March, 2009.

cc: Daniel Kaplan

Federal Public Defender’s Office

850 West Jefferson Street

Suite 201

Phoenix, AZ 85004

Case 2:08-cv-02226-DGC Document 14 Filed 03/04/09 Page 2 of 2