Mullner v. Johnson

CourtDistrict Court, D. Nevada
DecidedJune 11, 2020
Docket2:20-cv-00535
StatusUnknown

This text of Mullner v. Johnson (Mullner v. Johnson) 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
Mullner v. Johnson, (D. Nev. 2020).

Opinion

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3 TROY LEE MULLNER, Case No.: 2:20-cv-00535-JAD-BNW

4 Petitioner Order Granting Motion 5 v. to Appoint Counsel and Directing Service of Habeas Petition 6 BRIAN WILLIAMS, et al., [ECF Nos. 1-1; 1-3] 7 Respondents

8 9 Petitioner Troy Lee Mullner has submitted a pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus 10 under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 and has now paid the filing fee.1 I have reviewed the petition as required 11 by Habeas Rule 4 and direct that it be docketed and served on respondents. 12 A petition for federal habeas corpus should include all claims for relief of which 13 petitioner is aware. If petitioner fails to include such a claim in his petition, he may be forever 14 barred from seeking federal habeas relief upon that claim.2 If petitioner is aware of any claim 15 not included in his petition, he should notify the court of that as soon as possible, perhaps by 16 means of a motion to amend his petition to add the claim. 17 Petitioner also moves for court-appointed counsel.3 There is no constitutional right to 18 appointed counsel for a federal habeas corpus proceeding.4 The decision to appoint counsel is 19 20

21 1 ECF Nos. 1-1, 7. 22 2 See 28 U.S.C. §2254(b) (successive petitions). 3 ECF No. 1-3. 23 4 Pennsylvania v. Finley, 481 U.S. 551, 555 (1987); Bonin v. Vasquez, 999 F.2d 425, 428 (9th Cir.1993). 1 generally discretionary.5 However, counsel must be appointed if the complexities of the case are 2 such that denial of counsel would amount to a denial of due process, and where the petitioner is a 3 person of such limited education as to be incapable of fairly presenting his claims.6 Here, 4 Mullner is serving a lengthy sentence, and it is unclear whether some of the legal issues he 5 wishes to raise are complex. Therefore, to ensure due process, I grant Mullner’s motion for

6 counsel. 7 I THEREFORE ORDER that the Clerk file and ELECTRONICALLY SERVE the 8 petition (ECF No. 1-1) on respondents. 9 I FURTHER ORDER that the Clerk add Aaron D. Ford, Nevada Attorney General, as 10 counsel for respondents. 11 I FURTHER ORDER that the Clerk detach and file petitioner’s motion for appointment 12 of counsel (ECF No. 1-3). 13 I FURTHER ORDER that petitioner’s motion for appointment of counsel (ECF No. 1-3) 14 is GRANTED.

15 I FURTHER ORDER that the Federal Public Defender for the District of Nevada (FPD) 16 is appointed to represent petitioner. 17 I FURTHER ORDER that the Clerk ELECTRONICALLY SERVE the FPD a copy of 18 this order, together with a copy of the petition for writ of habeas corpus (ECF No. 1-1). The 19 FPD has 30 days from the date of entry of this order to file a notice of appearance or to indicate 20 to the court its inability to represent petitioner in these proceedings. Once counsel has appeared 21 22 5 Chaney v. Lewis, 801 F.2d 1191, 1196 (9th Cir.1986), cert. denied, 481 U.S. 1023 (1987); 23 Bashor v. Risley, 730 F.2d 1228, 1234 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 838 (1984). 6 See Chaney, 801 F.2d at 1196; see also Hawkins v. Bennett, 423 F.2d 948 (8th Cir.1970). 1}| for petitioner in this case, the court will issue a scheduling order that will, among other things, 2|| set a deadline for the filing of an amended petition. 3 Dated: June 11, 2020

U.S. District Judge Jennifer A. Dorsey 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Mullner v. Johnson, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mullner-v-johnson-nvd-2020.