JOHNSON

v.

RUSSELL, CORRECTIONAL SUPERINTENDENT

Citator

Cited By

• Knaubert v. Goldsmith, 791 F.2d 722 (9th Cir. 1986)
  …s on whether the denial of petitioner’s motion for appointment of counsel amounted to a denial of due process.5 See Kreiling v. Field, 431 F. 2d 638, 640 (9th Cir.1970) (per curiam); Eskridge v. Rhay, 345 F. 2d 778, 782 (9th Cir.1965), cert. denied, 382 U.S. 996, 86 S.Ct. 582, 15 L.Ed.2d 483 (1966). The determination of the amount of process needed to protect a habeas petition [*729] er’s liberty interest will require the consideration of three distinct factors: First, the private interest that will be af…
• Schleper v. Ford Motor Co., 585 F.2d 1367 (8th Cir. 1978)
  …e that when scandalous, abusive or improper language or material is included in the pleadings, common practice is to strike the objectionable language, frequently with leave to amend. Skolnick v. Hallett, 350 F. 2d 861 (7th Cir. 1965), cert. denied, 382 U.S. 996, 86 S.Ct. 580, 15 L.Ed.2d 482 (1966); Ex parte Tyler, 70 F.R.D. 456 (E.D.Mo.1976); Martin v. Hunt, 28 F.R.D. 35 (D.Mass.1961); Mottaghi-Iravani v. International Commodities Corp., 20 F.R.D. 37 (S.D.N.Y.1956). Certainly the unexplained and unqualifie…
• Rennia Wright v. United States, 391 F.2d 542 (9th Cir. 1968)
  …nsel’s statement that he was satisfied with the court’s instructions. Wright v. United States, supra, at 364. Finally, appellant’s motion for appointment of counsel on appeal is denied. Eskridge v. Rhay, 345 F. 2d 778 (9th Cir. 1965), cert. denied, 382 U.S. 996, 86 S.Ct. 582, 15 L.Ed.2d 483 (1966). Affirmed. . The new witness was known to appellant and could have been produced at trial. Ibid.…