Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-00427/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-00427-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Reggie C. Flewellen
Petitioner
James Tilton
Respondent

Document Text:

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

REGGIE C. FLEWELLEN,

Petitioner,

v.

JAMES TILTON, director,

Respondent. /

No. C 07-427 SI (pr)

ORDER EXTENDING DEADLINES

AND DENYING COUNSEL

Respondent has filed an ex parte application for an extension of time to respond to the

petition for writ of habeas corpus. Having considered the application and the accompanying

declaration of attorney Peggy Ruffra, the court GRANTS respondent's application. (Docket #

5.) Respondent must file and serve his motion to dismiss (or notice that such a motion is

unwarranted) no later than April 27, 2007. Petitioner must file and serve his opposition to the

motion no later than May 31, 2007. Respondent must file and serve his reply brief, if any, no

later than June 15, 2007.

Petitioner has moved for appointment of counsel to represent him in this action. A district

court may 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."

18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2)(B). 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), cert. denied, 481 U.S.

1023 (1987). Appointment is mandatory only when the circumstances of a particular case

indicate that appointed counsel is necessary to prevent due process violations. See id. Based

Case 3:07-cv-00427-SI Document 7 Filed 04/02/07 Page 1 of 2
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

2

on the materials in the court file, it does not appear that appointment of counsel is required in

this action to prevent a due process violation. The motion for appointment of counsel is

DENIED. (Docket # 4.) 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: April 2, 2007 _______________________

 SUSAN ILLSTON

United States District Judge

Case 3:07-cv-00427-SI Document 7 Filed 04/02/07 Page 2 of 2