Wang v. State of Washington

W.D. Washington

Wang v. State of Washington

DecidedApril 6, 2023

Docket2:21-cv-01353

StatusUnknown

This text of Wang v. State of Washington (Wang v. State of Washington) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. Washington primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Wang v. State of Washington, (W.D. Wash. 2023).

Pincite

Opinion

1 2 3 4

5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 7 8 WEI WANG, 9 Petitioner, Case No. C21-1353-JHC-SKV 10 v. ORDER DENYING PETITIONER’S MOTIONS FOR APPOINTMENT OF 11 DONALD HOLBROOK, COUNSEL 12 Respondent. 13

14 This is a habeas corpus action filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. This matter comes 15 before the Court on Petitioner’s Motions for Appointment of Counsel. Dkts. 20 & 21. The 16 Court, having reviewed Petitioner’s motions, and the balance of the record, hereby finds and 17 ORDERS as follows: 18 (1) Petitioner’s Motions for Appointment of Counsel, Dkts. 20 & 21, are DENIED. 19 There is no right to have counsel appointed in cases brought under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 unless an 20 evidentiary hearing is required. See Terravona v. Kincheloe, 852 F.2d 424, 429 (9th Cir. 1988); 21 Brown v. Vasquez, 952 F.2d 1164, 1168 (9th Cir. 1992); Rule 8(c) of the Rules Governing 22 Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts. The Court may, however, exercise its 23 1 discretion to appoint counsel for a financially eligible individual where the “interests of justice so 2 require.” 18 U.S.C. § 3006A. 3 At this juncture, the record is not sufficiently developed for the Court to determine 4 whether an evidentiary hearing will be required, and Petitioner has not demonstrated that the

5 interests of justice are best served by appointment of counsel. Counsel will be appointed, as 6 required, should the Court later determine that an evidentiary hearing is necessary. 7 (2) The Clerk is directed to send copies of this Order to the parties and to the 8 Honorable John H. Chun. 9 Dated this 6th day of April, 2023. 10 A 11 S. KATE VAUGHAN United States Magistrate Judge 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

1 2 3 4

5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 7 8 WEI WANG, 9 Petitioner, Case No. C21-1353-JHC-SKV 10 v. ORDER DENYING PETITIONER’S MOTIONS FOR APPOINTMENT OF 11 DONALD HOLBROOK, COUNSEL 12 Respondent. 13

14 This is a habeas corpus action filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. This matter comes 15 before the Court on Petitioner’s Motions for Appointment of Counsel. Dkts. 20 & 21. The 16 Court, having reviewed Petitioner’s motions, and the balance of the record, hereby finds and 17 ORDERS as follows: 18 (1) Petitioner’s Motions for Appointment of Counsel, Dkts. 20 & 21, are DENIED. 19 There is no right to have counsel appointed in cases brought under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 unless an 20 evidentiary hearing is required. See Terravona v. Kincheloe, 852 F.2d 424, 429 (9th Cir. 1988); 21 Brown v. Vasquez, 952 F.2d 1164, 1168 (9th Cir. 1992); Rule 8(c) of the Rules Governing 22 Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts. The Court may, however, exercise its 23 1 discretion to appoint counsel for a financially eligible individual where the “interests of justice so 2 require.” 18 U.S.C. § 3006A. 3 At this juncture, the record is not sufficiently developed for the Court to determine 4 whether an evidentiary hearing will be required, and Petitioner has not demonstrated that the

5 interests of justice are best served by appointment of counsel. Counsel will be appointed, as 6 required, should the Court later determine that an evidentiary hearing is necessary. 7 (2) The Clerk is directed to send copies of this Order to the parties and to the 8 Honorable John H. Chun. 9 Dated this 6th day of April, 2023. 10 A 11 S. KATE VAUGHAN United States Magistrate Judge 12

13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Wang v. State of Washington, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wang-v-state-of-washington-wawd-2023.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack