McDaniels v. Gittere

• Court: District Court, D. Nevada
• Decided: January 4, 2022
• Docket: 3:21-cv-00005
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4 DISTRICT OF NEVADA

5 * * *

6 HARVEY DEANDRE MCDANIELS, Case No. 3:21-cv-00005-MMD-WGC

7 Petitioner, ORDER v. 8 NDOC WARDEN GITTERE, et al., 9 Respondents. 10 11 Before the Court is 28 U.S.C. § 2254 pro se habeas corpus petitioner Harvey 12 DeAndre McDaniels’ second motion for appointment of counsel (“Motion”). (ECF No. 32.) 13 As discussed below, the Court denies the Motion. 14 The Court has previously explained in this case that there is no constitutional right 15 to appointed counsel for a federal habeas corpus proceeding. See Pennsylvania v. Finley, 16 481 U.S. 551, 555 (1987); Bonin v. Vasquez, 999 F.2d 425, 428 (9th Cir. 1993). The 17 decision to appoint counsel is generally discretionary. See Chaney v. Lewis, 801 F.2d 18 1191, 1196 (9th Cir. 1986), cert. denied, 481 U.S. 1023 (1987); Bashor v. Risley, 730 19 F.2d 1228, 1234 (9th Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 838 (1984). However, counsel 20 must be appointed if the complexities of the case are such that denial of counsel would 21 amount to a denial of due process, and where the petitioner is a person of such limited 22 education as to be incapable of fairly presenting his claims. See Chaney, 801 F.2d at 23 1196; Hawkins v. Bennett, 423 F.2d 948, 950 (8th Cir. 1970). 24 In his Motion, McDaniels states that he previously had another inmate help him 25 with his petition and now that he has been transferred, he has no help. (ECF No. 32 at 26 3.) While the Court is not unsympathetic to McDaniels’ situation, the Court still concludes 27 1 || his guilty plea are not particularly complex. The Court remains unpersuaded that counsel 2 || is justified. McDaniels’ Motion is thus denied. 3 It is therefore ordered that McDaniels’ second motion for appointment of counsel 4 || (ECF No. 32) is denied. 5 It is further ordered that McDaniels’ motion for extension of time (ECF No. 31) is 6 || denied as moot. 7 It is further ordered that McDaniels must file a reply in support of his petition, if any, 8 || within 30 days of the date of this order. 9 DATED THIS 4" Day of January 2022. 10 {A Lhd 11 wItaNOA □□ 0 CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28