Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-00261/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-00261-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Evans
Respondent
Robert C. Nawi
Petitioner

Document Text:

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ROBERT C. NAWI,

Petitioner,

v.

R. EVANS, warden,

Respondent. /

No. C 07-261 SI (pr)

ORDER DENYING APPLICATION

FOR (1) APPOINTMENT OF

COUNSEL AND (2) ADDITIONAL

TIME TO AMEND

Robert C. Nawi, an inmate at the Salinas Valley State Prison, filed this pro se action for

a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The court issued an order to show cause

on March 6, 2007, directing respondent to file an answer by May 18, 2007, and Nawi to file a

traverse by June 22, 2007. Last week, attorney Michael Burt filed “defendant’s ex parte

application for appointment of counsel and for additional time to file amended petition.” 

The application for appointment of counsel and for additional time to file an amended

petition is DENIED. (Docket # 3, # 4.) There are several problems with the application. First,

there is no written authorization from the intended client indicating his consent or desire to be

represented by counsel. If Nawi wants to be represented by counsel, the court expects to see

something signed by him indicating such an intent to be sure that the court does not thrust

counsel onto an unwilling client. Second, the application does not indicate whether counsel

wants to be paid by the government for his representation of Nawi. If counsel is not seeking

public funding and will be paid by the client, there is no need for a court order appointing him;

Nawi can simply file a substitution of counsel in which he substitutes attorney Burt in his place

Case 3:07-cv-00261-SI Document 5 Filed 05/17/07 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

27

28

2

to represent him. If counsel is seeking public funding for his representation of Nawi – a fact that

he should have made clear in his application – the application fails to show that Nawi is

financially unable to obtain representation. See 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(g). Nawi paid the initial

filing fee and did not file an in forma pauperis application. Third, it appears that counsel wants

to be appointed mainly to go to state court to take care of the problem of failure to exhaust state

court remedies for existing claims and/or new claims. See Burt Decl., ¶ 4. Appointment under

§ 3006A does not include funding to return to state court to present claims in state court. See

generally In re Lindsey, 875 F.2d 1502, 1506-07 (11th Cir. 1989). Fourth, the application for

additional time to file an amended petition is not the right procedural vehicle if Nawi’s problem

is that he has claims for which he has not exhausted state court remedies. Instead, he should file

a motion for stay that complies with Rhines v. Webber, 544 U.S. 269 (2005).

Although the court denies the application for appointment of counsel and for additional

time to file an amended petition, it recognizes that the problems with the application might be

able to be corrected. Accordingly, the denial is without prejudice to Nawi filing a new motion

for appointment of counsel and/or a motion for stay no later than July 6, 2007. 

In light of the possibility that there will be an amendment to the pleading and/or a stay,

the court vacates the existing briefing schedule set in the Order To Show Cause. Once the court

has an opportunity to consider any new motions to appoint counsel and for a stay, it will decide

whether to reset the briefing schedule. 

The clerk will mail a copy of this order to (1) petitioner Nawi, (2) attorney Michael Burt,

and (3) the California Attorney General’s office in San Francisco, California.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: May 17, 2007 

 SUSAN ILLSTON

United States District Judge

Case 3:07-cv-00261-SI Document 5 Filed 05/17/07 Page 2 of 2