(HC) Wirth v. Superior Court County of Sacramento

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 JAMES A. WIRTH, No. 2:20-cv-2213 AC P Petitioner, v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS

SUPERIOR COURT, COUNTY OF

SACRAMENTO,

15 Respondent. 16 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b), a motion for appointment of counsel, and a request to proceed in forma pauperis. ECF Nos. 1, 3, 6. Examination of the in forma pauperis application reveals that petitioner is unable to afford the costs of suit. Accordingly, the application to proceed in forma pauperis will be granted. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). Petitioner has filed a document styled as a motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b). However, the motion alleges constitutional defects in petitioner’s state criminal proceedings and clearly challenges his conviction in Sacramento County Superior Court Case No. 02F00680. ECF No. 1 at 5-10. Although petitioner explicitly states that his motion…