Carlos Alberto Rincon Nino v. Warden, et al.
Carlos Alberto Rincon Nino v. Warden, et al.
Trial Court Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 CARLOS ALBERTO RINCON NINO, Case No. 1:25-cv-1714-TLN-JDP (P) 12 Petitioner, 13 v. ORDER 14 WARDEN, et al., 15 Respondents. 16 17 Petitioner, an immigration detainee who is representing himself, filed a petition for a writ 18 of habeas corpus pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 2241. Petitioner has also filed an application to proceed 19 in forma pauperis, ECF No. 2, and a motion for appointed counsel, ECF No. 3.1 The court has 20 conducted a preliminary review of the petition pursuant to Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Habeas 21 Corpus Cases Under Section 2254.2 22 Petitioner’s motion for the appointment of counsel, ECF No. 3, will also be granted. In 23 light of the complexity of the legal issues involved, the court has determined that the interests of 24 justice require the appointment of counsel. See 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2)(B); see also Weygandt 25
1 Petitioner filed a motion to proceed in forma pauperis, ECF No. 2, but also paid the 26 $5.00 filing fee. Accordingly, his motion will be denied as moot. 27 2 Rule 1(b) of the Rules Governing Habeas Corpus Cases Under Section 2254 allows a district court to apply any or all of the rules to other types of habeas corpus petitions including 28 § 2241 petitions. 1 v. Look,
718 F.2d 952, 954(9th Cir. 1983). Within seven days of this order, the appointing 2 authority for the Eastern District of California shall identify counsel and send counsel’s contact 3 information to [email protected], and counsel will be added as counsel for 4 petitioner. If counsel is not a member of the Eastern District of California Criminal Justice Act 5 Panel, within seven days of this Order the Federal Defender shall file a motion to appoint counsel 6 as CJA counsel pro hac vice. 7 In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 8 1. Petitioner’s application to proceed in forma pauperis, ECF No. 2, is DENIED as moot 9 in light of his payment of the filing fee. 10 2. Petitioner’s request for appointment of counsel, ECF No. 3, is GRANTED. 11 3. The Clerk of the Court shall serve a copy of this order together with a copy of 12 petitioner’s application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 2241on the Federal 13 Defender, Attention: Habeas Appointment. 14 4. Within seven days of this order, the appointing authority for the Eastern District of 15 California shall identify counsel and send counsel’s contact information to 16 [email protected], and counsel will be added as counsel for petitioner. If counsel 17 is not a member of the Eastern District of California Criminal Justice Act Panel, within seven 18 days of this Order the Federal Defender shall file a motion to appoint counsel as CJA counsel pro 19 hac vice. 20 5. The Clerk of the Court shall serve a copy of this order together with a copy of 21 petitioner’s application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 2241on the United 22 States Attorney. 23 6. Within seven days of petitioner’s counsel appearing, the parties shall file a joint status 24 report addressing any motions the parties anticipate filing and a proposed briefing schedule for 25 such motions. 26 7. In order to ensure this court’s jurisdiction to resolve the pending § 2241 petition, 27 respondent shall not transfer petitioner to another detention center outside of this judicial district, 28 pending further order of the court. See
28 U.S.C. § 1651(a) (establishing the All Writs Act which 1 | empowers the federal courts to “issue all writs necessary or appropriate in aid of their respective 2 | jurisdictions. ...”); see also F.T.C. v. Dean Foods Co.,
384 U.S. 597, 604(1966) (emphasizing 3 | that federal courts have the power to “to preserve the court’s jurisdiction or maintain the status 4 | quo by injunction pending review of an agency’s action”); E-C-R v. Noem, No. 25-cv-1230-SI, 5 |
2025 WL 2300543, at *1 n.1 (D. Or. July 16, 2025) (“Courts around the country exercise their 6 | authority under the All Writs Act to maintain their jurisdiction over pending immigration matters 7 | by preserving the status quo.”). 8 9 IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: _ December 8, 2025 Q_——. 11 JEREMY D. PETERSON Db UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Reference
- Status
- Unknown