Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

HARRIS v. GIPSON, 2:13-cv-2604 TLN CKD P. (2015)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20150424c29 Visitors: 16
Filed: Apr. 23, 2015
Latest Update: Apr. 23, 2015
Summary: ORDER CAROLYN K. DELANEY , Magistrate Judge . Petitioner has renewed his request for the appointment of counsel. (ECF No. 46.) 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
More

ORDER

Petitioner has renewed his request for the appointment of counsel. (ECF No. 46.) 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. Moreover, as the petition is fully briefed, the court will disregard any further requests for appointment of counsel. (See ECF Nos. 12, 31 & 41, denying previous requests to appoint counsel.)

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that petitioner's motion for appointment of counsel (ECF No. 46) is denied.

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