Opinion
No. 2:16-cv-1021 AC P
10-26-2016
TROY ANDERSON, Petitioner, v. SOLANO COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT, Respondent.
ORDER
Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with an application for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Currently before the court are a number of motions and requests for assistance filed by petitioner. ECF Nos. 11-16.
I. Procedural History
By order filed May 23, 2016, the petition was dismissed with leave to amend because petitioner failed to specify any grounds for relief. ECF No. 3. After two extensions of time, the amended petition is currently due on October 27, 2016. ECF No. 8. Petitioner was cautioned that no further extensions of time would be granted absent a showing of extraordinary cause. Id.
II. Requests for Counsel
Petitioner has filed two motions specifically requesting the appointment of counsel and several other requests that reference the request for counsel. ECF Nos. 11-15. There currently exists no absolute right to appointment of counsel in habeas proceedings. See Nevius v. Sumner, 105 F.3d 453, 460 (9th Cir. 1996). However, 18 U.S.C. § 3006A authorizes the appointment of counsel at any stage of the case "if the interests of justice so require." See Rule 8(c), Fed. R. Governing § 2254 Cases. As he was previously advised, petitioner has not yet stated any grounds for relief and is being given an opportunity to amend the petition to correct this omission. ECF No. 3 at 2. In the absence of cognizable claims, the court cannot determine whether appointment of counsel might be appropriate.
Petitioner generally asserts that he lacks legal knowledge, has limited access to legal materials, and his incarcerations makes it difficult for him to proceed pro se. ECF No. 12. However, these are issues common to most inmates and are insufficient to warrant the appointment of counsel. Petitioner further asserts that he has mental health conditions that necessitate the appointment of counsel, yet he fails to specify what conditions he has been diagnosed with and provides no records verifying his diagnoses and treatment. ECF Nos. 11, 13. Petitioner also has not explained or offered evidence of how his unspecified conditions affect his ability to proceed without the assistance of counsel. The fact that petitioner may be diagnosed with or receiving treatment for a mental health condition, without more, does not warrant appointment of counsel. The motion will therefore be denied without prejudice. Any future motion for appointment of counsel based on petitioner's mental health must include evidence of petitioner's diagnosis and how it prevents him from representing himself. Petitioner is cautioned, however, that a showing of mental impairment will not entitle him to appointed counsel in the absence of viable claims for relief.
III. Request for Court Order and Stay of Proceedings
Petitioner has also filed a request for the court to issue an order directing the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) to complete an "inmate request for assistance from the court" form. ECF No. 13. It appears that he seeks to offer this form as evidence of his mental health diagnoses and in support of his requests for counsel. Id. The form has spaces for a CDCR employee to identify the disabilities petitioner claims to suffer from and what accommodations he is requesting because of those disabilities. See id. at 3-4. However, it does not verify that petitioner does in fact have those conditions, nor does it establish that he is unable to proceed without counsel because of them. Id. Moreover, even if the form was intended to verify an inmate's medical and mental health conditions, the court cannot compel the CDCR or its employees to certify that petitioner has a disability and requires some form of assistance or accommodation. These are determinations that must be made by the appropriate medical personnel. Moreover, as addressed above, the presence of a disability does not guarantee that appointment of counsel is appropriate.
Petitioner also requests that the court stay the proceedings while he is waiting for the court to order CDCR to complete the inmate request form and for CDCR to complete the form. ECF Nos. 11, 13. Since the request for a court order is being denied, any request for a stay is moot. Additionally, petitioner has yet to file an amended petition so there is currently nothing pending before the court to stay.
Petitioner's request for a court order and stay of proceedings will therefore be denied.
IV. There is No Attorney-Client Relationship with the Court
Petitioner has filed two requests, styled as letters to the undersigned, that indicate that petitioner believes he and the undersigned have an attorney-client relationship. ECF Nos. 14, 16. To be clear, there is no attorney-client relationship between petitioner and the undersigned judge, and everything that petitioner sends to the undersigned will be filed publicly in this case unless petitioner moves to file under seal and the motion is granted. The undersigned does not represent petitioner and cannot provide him with legal advice.
Petitioner requests that he be provided with a phone number at which he may contact the undersigned in order to "discuss matters that are personal, legal & grave & to converse w[ith the undersigned] freely as any attorney could within chambers." ECF No. 16 at 3. Such communications are inappropriate between a judge and a pro se party, and would be equally inappropriate between a judge and a lawyer for a party. Attorneys do not converse freely with judges, in private, about pending cases. Attorneys, and pro se parties, may communicate with the judge only in the presence of opposing counsel or in documents that are filed and served on opposing counsel. Accordingly, petitioner may communicate with the court only through //// documents that are filed with the Clerk of the Court. Requests for legal advice will not be granted.
Petitioner also requests a "standard information packet & instruction manual" on how to apply for a "protection order," and appears to be attempting to raise claims related to the violation of his constitutional rights in connection with an alleged assault and deficient medical care. ECF No. 14. Petitioner appears to be seeking information on how to request a preliminary injunction or temporary restraining order. The court does not have a standard information packet or instruction manual for motions for preliminary injunction or temporary restraining order. Petitioner is further advised that claims concerning the conditions of his confinement and violations of his constitutional rights are properly raised in a civil rights complaint filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, which provides a remedy for violations of civil rights by state actors. A habeas corpus petition is the correct method for a prisoner to challenge the "legality or duration" of his confinement. Badea v. Cox, 931 F.2d 573, 574 (9th Cir. 1991) (quoting Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475, 485 (1973)); 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Claims regarding officer conduct are not properly presented in a habeas action such as this, and if petitioner seeks to pursue these claims he must bring them in a separate civil rights action after he has exhausted his available administrative remedies.
V. Request for Forms and Information
Finally, petitioner requests that the court "search, find & locate all prior case filings by providing [petitioner] w[ith] a printout of all past activity of civil cases, 1983's, motions, pleadings, etc. w[ith] the case names entitled recorded in the California U.S. District Courts - (all courts) & (all districts)." ECF No. 15. He also requests that the court search for and send him forms, case law packets, procedures, and filing instructions for federal tort actions and the court's list of counsel available for appointment. Id. This request will be denied. The court does not maintain the kind of informational and instructional packets petitioner seeks, and it is not appropriate for the court to search for and compile the kind of information petitioner seeks. Petitioner is informed that if the court determines that appointment of counsel is appropriate in a habeas case, the Office of the Federal Defender is responsible for providing representation or locating alternate counsel willing to accept appointment under the Criminal Justice Act.
VI. Amended Petition
Petitioner will be given a final thirty days in which to file an amended petition, up to and including November 28, 2016. No further extensions will be granted. Failure to file an amended petition will result in a recommendation that this case be dismissed.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Petitioner's requests for appointment of counsel (ECF Nos. 11, 12) are denied without prejudice to a renewal of the motion at a later stage of the proceedings.
2. Petitioner's request for a court order and stay of proceedings (ECF Nos. 11, 13) is denied.
3. Petitioner's request for information on how to file a motion for a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction (ECF No. 14) is denied.
4. Petitioner's request for forms and information (ECF No. 15) is denied.
5. Petitioner's request for a phone number at which to contact the undersigned (ECF No. 16) is denied.
6. Petitioner shall file an amended petition by November 28, 2016. No further extensions will be granted. Failure to file an amended petition will result in a recommendation that this case be dismissed. DATED: October 26, 2016
/s/_________
ALLISON CLAIRE
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE