Muhamd v. ICE Field Office Director
Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE Petitioner, CASE NO. 2:20-cv-01862-RSM-BAT v. ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL Respondent.
Petitioner moves the Court to appoint counsel in this 28 U.S.C. § 2241 habeas action. Dkt. 6. Petitioner request counsel be appointed because he is indigent, has been in immigration custody for three years, and claims his continued detention violates his constitutional rights. There is no right to have counsel appointed in § 2241 cases unless an evidentiary hearing is required. See Terravona v. Kincheloe, 852 F.2d 424, 429 (9th Cir. 1988); Brown v. Vasquez, 952 F.2d 1164, 1168 (9th Cir. 1992). At this point it is premature to find an evidentiary hearing is needed. The present petition is the second request for habeas relief filed by petitioner. His first habeas petition was filed on March 4, 2020 and docketed under case number 2:20-cv-00605- RAJ. The assigned district judge dismissed this petition on October 28, 2020. Given the case history of the prior petition and the present matter, the court finds petitioner has the ability articulate his claims and that the interests of justice do not require appointment of counsel. The Court accordingly DENIES petitioner’s motion to appoint counsel. Dkt. 6. The Clerk shall send copies of this Order to petitioner and the assigned District Judge. DATED this 15th day of January, 2021. A
BRIAN A. TSUCHIDA Chief United States Magistrate Judge
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Muhamd v. ICE Field Office Director (Muhamd v. ICE Field Office Director) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.