MD Nurulhuda SHAPAN v. Christopher LaROSE

Opinion

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 3 MD Nurulhuda SHAPAN, Case No.: 26-cv-0917-AGS-BLM

4 Petitioner, ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO 5 v. APPOINT COUNSEL (ECF 7) 6 Christopher LaROSE, 7 Respondent. 8

9 Self-represented petitioner MD Nurulhuda Shapan requests appointed counsel in 10 support of his habeas corpus petition. (See ECF 7); see also 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (habeas 11 corpus). Courts may appoint an attorney for an “impoverished habeas petitioner” when 12 “the interests of justice so require.” Bashor v. Risley, 730 F.2d 1228, 1234 (9th Cir. 1984) 13 (cleaned up); see also 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2)(B). In this assessment, courts evaluate an 14 indigent petitioner’s (a) “likelihood of success on the merits” and (b) “ability . . . to 15 articulate his claims pro se in light of the complexity of the legal issues involved.” Wilborn 16 v. Escalderon, 789 F.2d 1328, 1331 (9th Cir. 1986). Although, at first blush, Shapan’s 17 likelihood of success on this petition does not look strong, the Court’s prior experience 18 with him and his lack of English proficiency convinces it that counsel is warranted. See 19 United States v. Ahumada-Aguilar, 295 F.3d 943, 950 (9th Cir. 2002) (noting that 20 immigration law is “second only to the Internal Revenue Code in complexity” (quotation 21 marks omitted)); Torres v. Barr, 976 F.3d 918, 923 (9th Cir. 2020) (“Divining [the 22 immigration laws’] meaning is ordinarily not for the faint of heart.”). See generally Shapan 23 v. Warden, 25-cv-3817-AGS-VET, ECF 12 (S.D. Cal. 2025). The Court provisionally 24 appoints Federal Defenders of San Diego, Inc., to initially determine if petitioner qualifies 25 for representation by that organization. The Clerk is directed to forward a copy of this order 26 to Federal Defenders. 27 By March 19, 2026, Federal Defenders must submit a notice to the Court concerning 28 whether it can and will accept the appointment. By that same date, Federal Defenders must 1 || also state whether, under Chief Judge Order 134, it “requests to file supplemental briefing.” 2 || As a result, the current hearing date is vacated and will be reset once the Court hears from 3 || counsel. 4 || Dated: March 12, 2026

6 Hon. Andrew G. Schopler 7 United States District Judge 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28