JOHNSON v. SWARTHOUT, CIV-S-11-2715 GEB CKD P. (2012)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20120221762
Visitors: 15
Filed: Feb. 16, 2012
Latest Update: Feb. 16, 2012
Summary: ORDER CAROLYN K. DELANEY, Magistrate Judge. Petitioner has requested the appointment of counsel. There currently exists no absolute right to appointment of counsel in habeas proceedings. See Nevius v. Sumner , 105 F.3d 453 , 460 (9th Cir. 1996). 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), Fed. R. Governing 2254 Cases. In the present case, the court does not find that the interests of j
Summary: ORDER CAROLYN K. DELANEY, Magistrate Judge. Petitioner has requested the appointment of counsel. There currently exists no absolute right to appointment of counsel in habeas proceedings. See Nevius v. Sumner , 105 F.3d 453 , 460 (9th Cir. 1996). 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), Fed. R. Governing 2254 Cases. In the present case, the court does not find that the interests of ju..
More
ORDER
CAROLYN K. DELANEY, Magistrate Judge.
Petitioner has requested the appointment of counsel. There currently exists no absolute right to appointment of counsel in habeas proceedings. See Nevius v. Sumner, 105 F.3d 453, 460 (9th Cir. 1996). 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), Fed. R. Governing § 2254 Cases. In the present case, the court does not find that the interests of justice would be served by the appointment of counsel at the present time.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that petitioner's requests for appointment of counsel (Docket Nos. 16 and 20) are denied.
Source: Leagle
