Bladimir Ascencio-Aguilar v. Warden of the Mesa Verde Detention Center, et al.

Opinion

2 3 4

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10

11 BLADIMIR ASCENCIO-AGUILAR, Case No. 1:26-cv-01416-KES-EPG-HC

12 Petitioners, ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO APPOINT COUNSEL 13 v.

14 WARDEN OF THE MESA VERDE (ECF No. 2) DETENTION CENTER, et al., 15 ORDER APPOINTING COUNSEL FOR Respondents. PETITIONER 16 ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT 17 TO SERVE DOCUMENTS

18 ORDER DIRECTING PARTIES TO FILE JOINT STATEMENT 19 20 Petitioner is an immigration detainee proceeding with a petition for a writ of habeas 21 corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Petitioner has moved for appointment of counsel. (ECF No. 22 2.) 23 There currently exists no absolute right to appointment of counsel in habeas proceedings. 24 See, e.g., Chaney v. Lewis, 801 F.2d 1191, 1196 (9th Cir. 1986); Anderson v. Heinze, 258 F.2d 25 479, 481 (9th Cir. 1958). However, 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2)(B) authorizes the appointment of 26 counsel at any stage of the proceeding for financially eligible persons if “the interests of justice 27 so require.” To determine whether to appoint counsel, the “court must evaluate the likelihood of 1 of the complexity of the legal issues involved.” Weygandt v. Look, 718 F.2d 952, 954 (9th Cir. 2 1983). 3 The petition raises a prolonged detention due process claim. (ECF 1 at 6–17.) After the 4 Court’s preliminary review of the petition, the Court construed the petition as also challenging 5 the statutory authority for Petitioner’s detention. (ECF No. 5 at 1.) On March 6, 2026, 6 Respondents filed a response to the petition, stating that “[u]nlike other cases decided by the 7 Court where the Court has granted habeas relief, Petitioner has a final order of removal 8 (reinstated). That removal order subjects him to mandatory detention in accordance with 8 9 U.S.C. 1231.” (ECF No. 10 at 1.) 10 The Court finds that the interests of justice would be served by the appointment of 11 counsel given the complexity of the legal issues involved. 12 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 13 1. The motion to appoint counsel (ECF No. 2) is GRANTED; 14 2. Counsel is APPOINTED for Petitioner; 15 3. The Clerk of the Court shall serve a copy of this order and a copy of the petition, via 16 email, on the Federal Defender’s Office at cae_appointments_habeas@fd.org; 17 4. Within seven (7) days of the date of service of this order, the Federal Defender, as 18 appointing authority for the Eastern District of California, SHALL identify counsel and 19 send counsel’s contact information to undersigned’s courtroom deputy Felicia Navarro at 20 FNavarro@caed.uscourts.gov, and counsel will be added as counsel for Petitioner; 21 5. Such appointment, as necessary, will be pro hac vice to the CJA Panel and to this District 22 in this matter only; 6. This appointment will be nunc pro tunc to the Federal Defender contacting counsel about 23 this appointment on a date given to the courtroom deputy; and 24 /// 25 /// 26 /// 27 /// 1 7. Within fourteen (14) days of the date of service of this order, the parties shall file a joint 2 statement regarding case management and a proposed briefing schedule. 3 4 IT IS SO ORDERED.

5| Dated: _March 11, 2026 [Je heey — ‘ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

7 8 9 10 1] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28