Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_06-cv-05182/USCOURTS-cand-4_06-cv-05182-0/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

---

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

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

WILLIAM RUSSELL GARRETT,

Petitioner,

 v.

D.L. RUNNELS, Warden,

Respondent. /

No. C 06-05182 SBA (PR)

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR

APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL AND

SETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE ON

PETITIONER'S MOTION FOR LEAVE

TO AMEND PETITION

(Docket no. 15)

Petitioner William Russell Garrett, a prisoner of the State of California incarcerated at

California State Prison - Los Angeles, filed a pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to

28 U.S.C. § 2254. The Court issued an order to show cause requiring Respondent to show cause

why the petition for a writ of habeas corpus should not be granted. Respondent filed an answer on

April 30, 2007. Petitioner filed a traverse on May 25, 2007.

Before the Court is Petitioner's "Motion for 'Reasonable Accomadation' [sic] A.D.A. Title

II," in which Petitioner requests appointment of counsel in this action because he claims he "suffers

from mental disabilities (organic brain disorder, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, episodic

explosiveness, depression, and a mood disorder)." (May 25, 2007 Mot. at 1.) Therefore, the Court

construes his motion as a motion for appointment of counsel.

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

Knaubert v. Goldsmith, 791 F.2d 722, 728 (9th Cir. 1986). Title 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2)(B),

however, authorizes a district court 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. The decision to appoint counsel is within the discretion of the district court. 

See Chaney v. Lewis, 801 F.2d 1191, 1196 (9th Cir. 1986); Knaubert, 791 F.2d at 728; Bashor v.

Risley, 730 F.2d 1228, 1234 (9th Cir. 1984). The courts have made appointment of counsel the

exception rather than the rule by limiting it to: (1) capital cases; (2) cases that turn on substantial and

complex procedural, legal or mixed legal and factual questions; (3) cases involving uneducated or

mentally or physically impaired petitioners; (4) cases likely to require the assistance of experts either

in framing or in trying the claims; (5) cases in which petitioner is in no position to investigate crucial

Case 4:06-cv-05182-SBA Document 19 Filed 03/24/08 Page 1 of 3
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

 The California Supreme Court's official website shows that the habeas petition relating to his

three new claims was denied on June 20, 2007 in Garrett (William R.) On H.C., Cal. S. Ct. No.

S149609. 

P:\PRO-SE\SBA\HC.06\Garrett5182.denyATTY&sched.frm 2

facts; and (6) factually complex cases. See generally 1 J. Liebman & R. Hertz, Federal Habeas

Corpus Practice and Procedure § 12.3b at 383-86 (2d ed. 1994). Appointment is mandatory only

when the circumstances of a particular case indicate that appointed counsel is necessary to prevent

due process violations. See Chaney, 801 F.2d at 1196; Eskridge v. Rhay, 345 F.2d 778, 782 (9th

Cir. 1965). 

Even if Petitioner alleges that he is somewhat mentally impaired, the Court finds that

appointment of counsel is not warranted in this case. Petitioner's claims were all well briefed by

counsel on direct appeal and in his state habeas petition. (Resp't Ex. 7, 8.) They are typical claims

that arise in criminal appeals and are not especially complex. This is not an exceptional case,

therefore, that would warrant representation on federal habeas review. Petitioner's motion for

appointment of counsel (docket no. 15) is DENIED.

Also before the Court is Petitioner's "Declaration and Opposition to Answer for Writ of

Habeas Corpus" (docket no. 16) in which Petitioner states that he "would like to amend his petition

to add the three other related claims now being exhausted in the state supreme court."1

 (May 25,

2008 Mot. at 2.) The Court construes this motion as a motion for leave to amend the petition. The

Court notes the certificate of service shows the motion was served on Respondent's attorney, the

Attorney General's office. Therefore, this motion is not ex parte, and the Court will issue a further

briefing schedule on the motion for leave to amend the petition. Respondent shall file any

opposition to the motion for leave to amend the petition (docket no. 16) within thirty (30) days of

the date of this Order. Petitioner may file a reply within thirty (30) days of the date of his receipt of

the opposition. 

This Order terminates Docket no. 15.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED:_3/20/08 _______________________________

SAUNDRA BROWN ARMSTRONG

United States District Judge

Case 4:06-cv-05182-SBA Document 19 Filed 03/24/08 Page 2 of 3
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

P:\PRO-SE\SBA\HC.06\Garrett5182.denyATTY&sched.frm 3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

WILLIAM RUSSELL GARRETT,

Plaintiff,

 v.

D.L. RUNNELS et al,

Defendant. /

Case Number: CV06-05182 SBA 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S. District

Court, Northern District of California.

That on March 24, 2008, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the attached, by placing said

copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter listed, by depositing said

envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into an inter-office delivery receptacle

located in the Clerk's office.

William R. Garrett V-30110

California State Prison, Los Angeles

P.O. Box 8457

Lancaster, CA 93539-8457

Dated: March 24, 2008

Richard W. Wieking, Clerk

By: LISA R CLARK, Deputy Clerk

Case 4:06-cv-05182-SBA Document 19 Filed 03/24/08 Page 3 of 3