Gurpartap Singh v. Warden of the Golden State Annex, et al.
This text of Gurpartap Singh v. Warden of the Golden State Annex, et al. (Gurpartap Singh v. Warden of the Golden State Annex, et al.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
2 3 4
8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10
11 GURPARTAP SINGH, Case No. 1:25-cv-01689-KES-EPG-HC
12 Petitioner, ORDER REGARDING APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL 13 v.
14 WARDEN OF THE GOLDEN STATE ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT ANNEX, et al., TO SERVE DOCUMENTS 15 Respondents. 16 17 Petitioner, an immigration detainee who is representing himself, filed a petition for a writ 18 of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. 19 There currently exists no absolute right to appointment of counsel in habeas proceedings. 20 See, e.g., Chaney v. Lewis, 801 F.2d 1191, 1196 (9th Cir. 1986); Anderson v. Heinze, 258 F.2d 21 479, 481 (9th Cir. 1958). However, 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2)(B) authorizes the appointment of 22 counsel at any stage of the proceeding for financially eligible persons if “the interests of justice 23 so require.” To determine whether to appoint counsel, the “court must evaluate the likelihood of 24 success on the merits as well as the ability of the petitioner to articulate his claims pro se in light 25 of the complexity of the legal issues involved.” Weygandt v. Look, 718 F.2d 952, 954 (9th Cir. 26 1983). 27 In light of Petitioner’s allegations that he was detained on May 26, 2025, during a 1 | ins, (ECF No. 1 at 6-7), the Court finds that the interests of justice would be served by the 2, | appointment of counsel if Petitioner is financially eligible given the complexity of the legal 3 | issues involved. 4 Accordingly, the Court HEREBY ORDERS: 5 1. The matter is hereby referred to the Federal Public Defender’s Office to find counsel for 6 Petitioner if Petitioner is financially eligible for appointment of counsel pursuant to 18 7 US.C. § 3006A(a)(2)(B). 8 2. Within SEVEN (7) days of the date of service of this order, a notice shall be filed with 9 the Court by the Federal Public Defender’s Office regarding whether Petitioner is 10 financially eligible for appointment of counsel. 11 3. The Clerk of the Court shall serve a copy of this order and the petition for writ of habeas 12 corpus on the Federal Defender, Attention: Habeas Appointment. 13 IT IS SO ORDERED. 14 15 Dated: _ December 3, 2025 [sl heey 6 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Gurpartap Singh v. Warden of the Golden State Annex, et al., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gurpartap-singh-v-warden-of-the-golden-state-annex-et-al-caed-2025.