Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Edwards v. Baughman, 17-cv-06469-SI. (2018)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20180702853 Visitors: 14
Filed: Jun. 28, 2018
Latest Update: Jun. 28, 2018
Summary: ORDER DENYING SECOND REQUEST FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL Re: Dkt. No. 25 SUSAN ILLSTON , District Judge . Petitioner has requested that counsel be appointed to represent him in this action. A district court may appoint counsel to represent a habeas petitioner whenever "the court determines that the interests of justice so require" and such person is financially unable to obtain representation. 18 U.S.C. 3006A(a)(2)(B). The decision to appoint counsel is within the discretion of the distri
More

ORDER DENYING SECOND REQUEST FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL

Re: Dkt. No. 25

Petitioner has requested that counsel be appointed to represent him in this action. A district court may appoint counsel to represent a habeas petitioner whenever "the court determines that the interests of justice so require" and such person is financially unable to obtain representation. 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2)(B). The decision to appoint counsel is within the discretion of the district court. See Chaney v. Lewis, 801 F.2d 1191, 1196 (9th Cir. 1986). Appointment is mandatory only when the circumstances of a particular case indicate that appointed counsel is necessary to prevent due process violations. See id. The interests of justice do not require appointment of counsel at this time. The request for appointment of counsel is DENIED. Docket No. 25.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer