1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 WILLIAM POLLARD, No. 2:24-cv-1747 WBS AC P 12 Petitioner, 13 v. ORDER 14 ROB ST. ANDRE, 15 Respondent. 16 17 Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding through counsel. By order filed July 21, 2025, the 18 petition was denied and petitioner was granted a certificate of appealability on his Batson1 claim 19 only. ECF No. 20. Petitioner proceeded to file a notice of appeal, motion to proceed in forma 20 pauperis on appeal, and a motion to appoint counsel on appeal. ECF Nos. 22-24. 21 Petitioner’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis is properly before this court. Fed. R. 22 App. P. 24(a). Examination of the in forma pauperis application reveals that petitioner is unable 23 to afford the costs of suit. Accordingly, the application to proceed in forma pauperis will be 24 granted. See

(a). However, the motion to appoint counsel on appeal is a matter 25 for the Ninth Circuit’s consideration. 26 //// 27

28 1 Batson v. Kentucky,

(1986). ] Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. Petitioner’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 23) is GRANTED; and 3 2. Petitioner’s motion to appoint counsel (ECF No. 24) is DENIED without prejudice to 4 | renewal in the Ninth Circuit. 5 || DATED: August 28, 2025 ~ 6 Hthren— Lhor—e_ ALLISON CLAIRE 7 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 8 9 10 1] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28