Charles
Hoa Duc Nguyen v. Marcos Charles
Opinion
trial_court Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 HOA DUC NGUYEN, No. 1:25-cv-1592 TLN CSK P 12 Petitioner, 13 v. ORDER 14 MARCOS CHARLES, 15 Respondent. 16 17 Petitioner, an immigration detainee proceeding pro se, filed a petition for a writ of habeas 18 corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Petitioner paid the Court’s filing fee, but also filed a 19 motion to proceed in forma pauperis. (ECF No. 2.) 20 Examination of the affidavit reveals petitioner is unable to afford the costs of this action. 21 Accordingly, leave to proceed in forma pauperis is granted. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). 22 Petitioner filed a motion for appointment of counsel on November 19, 2025. (ECF No. 3.) 23 In light of the complexity of the legal issues involved, the court has determined that the interests 24 of justice require the appointment of counsel. See 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2)(B); see also 25 Weygandt v. Look, 718 F.2d 952, 954 (9th Cir. 1983). The court will appoint the Federal Public 26 Defender to represent petitioner…