Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01857/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01857-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Attorney General of the State of California
Respondent
Low Paul Lueras
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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LOW PAUL LUERAS,

Petitioner, No. CIV-S-05-1857 DFL KJM P 

vs.

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE

OF CALIFORNIA,

 

Respondent. ORDER

 /

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a petition for writ of habeas

corpus under28 U.S.C. § 2254, together with a request to proceed in forma pauperis.

Examination of the affidavit reveals petitioner is unable to afford the costs of this

action. Accordingly, leave to proceed in forma pauperis is granted. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a).

Petitioner has submitted his petition for writ of habeas corpus on the forum issued

to prisoners by this court. However, petitioner has not filled out the form completely; in

particular he has not completed section 10 and 11. Petitioner’s habeas petition thus will be

dismissed. The court will direct the Clerk of the Court to send petitioner a second form-habeas

petition and petitioner will be given leave to complete it. An amended petition form will

completely supersede the original petition filed, and therefore must contain all information

related to petitioner’s case. Petitioner’s failure to submit a completed habeas petition within

thirty days will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed without prejudice.

Case 2:05-cv-01857-RRB -KJM Document 9 Filed 12/01/05 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

Petitioner has requested the appointment of counsel. 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). However, 18 U.S.C. § 3006A authorizes the appointment of counsel at

any stage of the case “if the interests of justice so require.” See Rule 8(c), Fed. R. Governing

§ 2254 Cases. In the present case, the court does not find that the interests of justice would be

served by the appointment of counsel at the present time. 

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

1. Petitioner’s request to proceed in forma pauperis is granted.

2. Petitioner's application for writ of habeas corpus is dismissed with leave to

amend within thirty days from the date of this order.

3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to send petitioner the form for habeas corpus

application used by this court. 

4. Petitioner’s amended petition must be filed on the form employed by this court

and must state all claims and prayers for relief on the form. Petitioner must fill out the amended

form completely, the form must bear the case number assigned to this action and must bear the

title “Amended Petition.”

5. Petitioner’s September 28, 2005 request for the appointment of counsel is

denied.

DATED: November 30, 2005.

______________________________________

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

1

luer1857.115

Case 2:05-cv-01857-RRB -KJM Document 9 Filed 12/01/05 Page 2 of 2