1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11 CARLOS RIOS, Case No.: 25-cv-2866-JES-VET
12 Petitioner,
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO
13 v. APPOINT COUNSEL
14 KRISTI NOEM, Secretary, U.S.
Department of Homeland Security; [ECF No. 3]
15
PAMELA BONDI, Attorney General of
16 the United States; TODD M. LYONS,
Acting Director, Immigration and
17
Customs Enforcement; JESUS
18 ROCHA, Acting Field Office Director,
San Diego Field Office; and
19
CHRISTOPHER J. LAROSE, Senior
20 Warden, Otay Mesa Detention Center,
21 Respondents.
22
23 Before the Court is Petitioner’s Motion for Appointment of Counsel. ECF No. 3.
24 Petitioner moves for appointment of counsel pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2). Id. at 2.
25 Under this statute, the district court may appoint counsel for an impoverished habeas
26 petitioner seeking relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 whenever “the court determines that the
27 interest of justice so require …” Bashor v. Risley, 730 F.2d 1228, 1234 (9th Cir. 1984)
28 (quoting 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(g)). The Court “must evaluate both the likelihood of success
1 ||}on the merits and the ability of the petitioner to articulate his claims pro se in light of the
2 || complexity of the legal issues involved.” Rand v. Rowland, 113 F.3d 1520 (9th Cir. 1997)
3 || (citations omitted).
4 The Federal Defenders of San Diego, Inc., is ready and able to assist Petitioner in
5 matter. See generally ECF No. 3. Having carefully considered the arguments raised
6 ||in Petitioner’s motion, the Court finds that the appointment of counsel 1s appropriate in
7 || this case. The Court therefore GRANTS Petitioner’s motion for appointment of counsel
8 |}and APPOINTS Federal Defenders of San Diego, Inc. to represent him.
9 IT IS SO ORDERED.
10
11 || Dated: October 27, 2025 Smet
12 Honorable James E. Sunmons Jr.
13 United States District Judge
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Not legal advice. These patterns come from public court records, not ratings of judges as people. They may reflect the types of cases a judge handles, local procedures or other factors, and they do not account for the facts of any individual case. Past patterns do not predict future rulings. Records can be incomplete, months behind current activity, or matched to the wrong person; sealed and confidential cases are not included. Use this as one piece of information, never the sole basis for legal strategy or a recusal motion. Full disclaimer: https://judgefinder.io/legal/disclaimer Read the full disclaimer.