(HC)Caridad v. Black

Opinion

BENJAMIN TABAYOYONG CARIDAD, Case No. 2:21-cv-00704-JDP (HC) Petitioner, ORDER DENYING PETITIONER’S MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL AND v. GRANTING RESPONDENT’S MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME ECF Nos. 13, 15 Respondent. Petitioner has filed a motion for appointment of counsel. ECF No. 13. A petitioner in a habeas proceeding generally does not have a right to appointment of counsel. See Nevius v. Sumner, 105 F.3d 453, 460 (9th Cir. 1996). However, the court is authorized to appoint counsel at any stage of the case “if the interests of justice so require.” See Chaney v. Lewis, 801 F.2d 1191, 1196 (9th Cir. 1986); 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2)(B). In assessing whether to appoint counsel, the court evaluates the petitioner’s likelihood of success on the merits and his ability to articulate his claims, considering the complexity of the legal issues involved. See Weygandt v. Look, 718 F.2d 952, 954 (9th Cir. 1983). The court cannot conclude at this point that the interests of justice warrant appointing petitioner counsel. The legal issues involved in this action are not exceptionally complicated, and petitioner has not demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits. Accordingly, petitioner’s motion to appoint counsel, ECF No. 13, is denied without prejudice. Also pending 1s respondent’s motion for an extension of time to file a response to the petition for writ of habeas corpus. ECF No. 15. Good cause appearing, respondent’s motion 1s granted. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that: 1. Petitioner’s motion for appointment of counsel, ECF No. 13, is denied without prejudice. 2. Respondent’s motion for an extension of time, ECF No. 15, is granted. 3. Respondent is granted until September 24, 2021, to file her response to the petition. ll ( 4 ie — Dated: _ July 25, 2021 JEREMY D. PETERSON UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE