Wilfredo Farinas Villafane v. Warden, Otay Mesa Detention Center

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 WILFREDO FARINAS VILLAFANE, Case No.: 26-CV-1541 JLS (BLM)

12 Petitioner, ORDER REFERRING PETITION TO 13 v. FEDERAL DEFENDERS FOR EVALUATION REGARDING 14 WARDEN, OTAY MESA DETENTION APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL CENTER, 15 Respondent. (ECF No. 1) 16 17 18 Presently before the Court is Petitioner Wilfredo Farinas Villafane’s Petition for 19 Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (“Pet.,” ECF No. 1). Having reviewed 20 the Petition, the Court finds that summary dismissal of the Petition is unwarranted at this 21 time. See Kourteva v. INS, 151 F. Supp. 2d 1126, 1128 (N.D. Cal. 2001) (“Summary 22 dismissal is appropriate only where the allegations in the petition are vague or conclusory, 23 palpably incredible, or patently frivolous or false.”) (citing Hendricks v. Vasquez, 908 F.2d 24 490, 491 (9th Cir. 1990)). However, the Court finds that the Petition lacks sufficient detail 25 for the Court to meaningfully consider the requested relief. Accordingly, the Court 26 REFERS this Petition to Federal Defenders for an evaluation of whether appointment of 27 counsel would be beneficial to Petitioner. The Court requests that Federal Defenders make 28 its evaluation and file a status report or appropriate motion, e.g., an amended petition, by 1 || April 2, 2026. The Clerk of the Court SHALL SERVE a copy of this Order and the 2 || Petition on the Federal Defenders of San Diego, Inc. 3 IT IS SO ORDERED. 4 Dated: March 12, 2026 . tt 5 pen Janis L. Sammartino 6 United States District Judge 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28