U.S. v. GOODMAN, 2:10-cr-0097 JAM DAD P. (2013)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20130830726
Visitors: 17
Filed: Aug. 29, 2013
Latest Update: Aug. 29, 2013
Summary: ORDER DALE A. DROZD, Magistrate Judge. Movant has requested the appointment of counsel. There currently exists no absolute right to appointment of counsel in 2255 proceedings. See, e.g. , Irwin v. United States , 414 F.2d 606 (9th Cir. 1969). However, 18 U.S.C. 3006A authorizes the appointment of counsel at any stage of the case "if the interests of justice so require." See Rule 8(c), Rules Governing Section 2255 Proceedings. In the present case, the court does not find that the inte
Summary: ORDER DALE A. DROZD, Magistrate Judge. Movant has requested the appointment of counsel. There currently exists no absolute right to appointment of counsel in 2255 proceedings. See, e.g. , Irwin v. United States , 414 F.2d 606 (9th Cir. 1969). However, 18 U.S.C. 3006A authorizes the appointment of counsel at any stage of the case "if the interests of justice so require." See Rule 8(c), Rules Governing Section 2255 Proceedings. In the present case, the court does not find that the inter..
More
ORDER
DALE A. DROZD, Magistrate Judge.
Movant has requested the appointment of counsel. There currently exists no absolute right to appointment of counsel in § 2255 proceedings. See, e.g., Irwin v. United States, 414 F.2d 606 (9th Cir. 1969). However, 18 U.S.C. § 3006A authorizes the appointment of counsel at any stage of the case "if the interests of justice so require." See Rule 8(c), Rules Governing Section 2255 Proceedings. In the present case, the court does not find that the interests of justice would be served by the appointment of counsel at this time. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that movant's August 22, 2013 motion for appointment of counsel (Docket No. 175) is denied without prejudice to a renewal of the request at a later stage of the proceedings.
Source: Leagle
