USA V. DANNY FABRICANT, No. 15-50251 (9th Cir. 2016)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED JUN 20 2016 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. U.S. COURT OF APPEALS No. 15-50251 D.C. No. 2:03-cr-01257-RSWL MEMORANDUM* DANNY JOSEPH FABRICANT, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Ronald S.W. Lew, District Judge, Presiding Submitted June 14, 2016** Before: BEA, WATFORD, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges. Danny Joseph Fabricant appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying his ex parte request for reimbursement of expenses pursuant to the Criminal Justice Act (“CJA”), 18 U.S.C. § 3006A. We affirm. Fabricant contends that the district court erred by denying his request for * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). reimbursement of the costs incurred in the preparation of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 petition. The CJA authorizes reimbursement of costs for pro se petitioners seeking habeas relief only where the district court determines that the interests of justice “would have required the furnishing of [CJA] representation.” See Guide to Judiciary Policy, Volume 7, Part A, § 310.10.30. Here, the district court previously determined that Fabricant did not meet the standard for CJA representation in his section 2255 proceeding. See 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2)(B) (section 2255 petitioner may be appointed CJA representation where the court “determines that the interests of justice so require”); see also Sanchez v. United States, 50 F.3d 1448, 1456 (9th Cir. 1995) (“[T]here is no constitutional right to counsel at a collateral, post-conviction section 2255 proceeding.”). Therefore, the court correctly determined that nothing in the CJA allows for Fabricant to receive the requested reimbursement. Fabricant’s May 2, 2016, request is denied. AFFIRMED. 2 15-50251
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
