From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Priest v. Sisto

United States District Court, E.D. California
May 2, 2008
No. CIV S-07-1186-JAM-CMK-P (E.D. Cal. May. 2, 2008)

Opinion

No. CIV S-07-1186-JAM-CMK-P.

May 2, 2008


ORDER


Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner challenges the denial of parole.

In light of the complexity of the legal and factual issues involved in this case, the court is considering sua sponte appointment of counsel in the interests of justice. See 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2)(B); see also Weygandt v. Look, 718 F.2d 952, 954 (9th Cir. 1983). However, petitioner is not proceeding in forma pauperis. In forma pauperis status is a prerequisite for the appointment of counsel. If petitioner wants the court to consider the appointment of counsel, he must complete and return an in forma pauperis application within 30 days.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. If petitioner wants the court to consider the appointment of counsel, he must complete and return an in forma pauperis application within 30 days of the date of service of this order; and

2. The Clerk of the Court is directed to send petitioner a form Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis By a Prisoner.


Summaries of

Priest v. Sisto

United States District Court, E.D. California
May 2, 2008
No. CIV S-07-1186-JAM-CMK-P (E.D. Cal. May. 2, 2008)
Case details for

Priest v. Sisto

Case Details

Full title:DAVID PRIEST, Petitioner, v. D.K. SISTO, Respondent

Court:United States District Court, E.D. California

Date published: May 2, 2008

Citations

No. CIV S-07-1186-JAM-CMK-P (E.D. Cal. May. 2, 2008)