Mahmoud v. Warden's of N.N.C.C.

CourtDistrict Court, D. Nevada
DecidedJanuary 5, 2023
Docket3:22-cv-00452
StatusUnknown

This text of Mahmoud v. Warden's of N.N.C.C. (Mahmoud v. Warden's of N.N.C.C.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. Nevada primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Mahmoud v. Warden's of N.N.C.C., (D. Nev. 2023).

Opinion

3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4 DISTRICT OF NEVADA

5 * * *

6 MOHAMED ABDALLA MAHMOUD, Case No. 3:22-cv-00452-MMD-CLB

7 Petitioner, ORDER v. 8 WARDEN’S OF N.N.C.C., et al., 9 Respondents. 10 11 Petitioner Mohamed Abdalla Mahmoud has submitted a pro se 28 U.S.C. § 2254 12 petition for writ of habeas corpus. He has now paid the filing fee. (ECF No. 7.) The Court 13 has reviewed the petition under Habeas Rule 4, and it will be docketed and served on 14 Respondents. 15 A petition for federal habeas corpus should include all claims for relief of which 16 Mahmoud is aware. If Mahmoud fails to include such a claim in his petition, he may be 17 forever barred from seeking federal habeas relief upon that claim. See 28 U.S.C. 18 §2254(b) (successive petitions). If Mahmoud is aware of any claim not included in his 19 petition, he should notify the Court of that as soon as possible, perhaps by means of a 20 motion to amend his petition to add the claim. 21 Mahmoud has also filed a motion for appointment of counsel. (ECF No. 4.) There 22 is no constitutional right to appointed counsel in a federal habeas corpus proceeding. See 23 Luna v. Kernan, 784 F.3d 640, 642 (9th Cir. 2015) (citing Lawrence v. Florida, 549 U.S. 24 327, 336-37 (2007)). An indigent petitioner may request appointed counsel to pursue 25 habeas relief. See 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2)(B). The decision to appoint counsel is 26 generally discretionary. See id. § 3006A(a)(2) (authorizing appointment of counsel “when 27 the interests of justice so require”). However, counsel is appropriate if the complexities of 28 the case are such that denial of counsel would amount to a denial of due process, and 2 claims. See LaMere v. Risley, 827 F.2d 622, 626 (9th Cir. 1987); Brown v. United States, 3 623 F.2d 54, 61 (9th Cir. 1980). Here, Mahmoud states that he pleaded guilty “under 4 mental disability status.” (ECF No. 1-1 at 2.) He alleges that his mental disability, including 5 suicidal thoughts, and physical illness or disability prevented him from timely pursuing 6 state postconviction relief. (Id.) It is unclear that Mahmoud sets forth viable claims for 7 federal habeas relief. However, in light of the allegations of serious mental illness, the 8 Court will appoint counsel in order to ensure due process. Mahmoud’s motion is therefore 9 granted. 10 It is therefore ordered that the Clerk of Court detach, file, and electronically serve 11 the petition (ECF No. 1-1) on Respondents. 12 It is further ordered that the Clerk of Court add Aaron D. Ford, Nevada Attorney 13 General, as counsel for Respondents and provide Respondents an electronic copy of all 14 items previously filed in this case by regenerating the Notice of Electronic Filing to the 15 Office of the Attorney General only. 16 It is further ordered that Mahmoud’s motion for appointment of counsel (ECF No. 17 4) is granted. 18 It is further ordered that the Federal Public Defender for the District of Nevada 19 (“FPD”) is appointed to represent Mahmoud. 20 It is further ordered that the Clerk of Court electronically serve the FPD a copy of 21 this order, together with a copy of the petition for writ of habeas corpus. (ECF No. 1-1.) 22 The FPD has 30 days from the date of entry of this order to file a notice of appearance or 23 to indicate to the Court its inability to represent Mahmoud in these proceedings. 24 It is further ordered that after counsel has appeared for Mahmoud in this case, the 25 Court will issue a scheduling order, which will, among other things, set a deadline for the 26 filing of an amended petition. 27 /// 28 /// 1 DATED THIS 5" Day of January 2023.

3 MIRANDA M. DU 4 CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 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

Ayers v. Belmontes
549 U.S. 7 (Supreme Court, 2006)
Richard E. Brown v. United States
623 F.2d 54 (Ninth Circuit, 1980)
Gary Lamere v. Henry Risley, Warden
827 F.2d 622 (Ninth Circuit, 1987)
Benito Luna v. Scott Kernan
784 F.3d 640 (Ninth Circuit, 2015)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Mahmoud v. Warden's of N.N.C.C., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mahmoud-v-wardens-of-nncc-nvd-2023.