United States v. Dalton, 96-cr-00276-SI-1. (2019)
Court: District Court, N.D. California
Number: infdco20190719876
Visitors: 6
Filed: Jul. 17, 2019
Latest Update: Jul. 17, 2019
Summary: ORDER DENYING MOTION TO APPOINT COUNSEL Re: Dkt. No. 713 SUSAN ILLSTON , District Judge . Defendant John Dalton filed this pro se motion requesting that the Court appoint counsel to investigate an alleged due process violation. Mot. Dkt. No 713. A district court may appoint counsel to represent a defendant in certain situations where the person is "financially unable to obtain representation" and the interests of justice so require. 18 U.S.C. 3006A(a)(2)(B). The decision to appoint coun
Summary: ORDER DENYING MOTION TO APPOINT COUNSEL Re: Dkt. No. 713 SUSAN ILLSTON , District Judge . Defendant John Dalton filed this pro se motion requesting that the Court appoint counsel to investigate an alleged due process violation. Mot. Dkt. No 713. A district court may appoint counsel to represent a defendant in certain situations where the person is "financially unable to obtain representation" and the interests of justice so require. 18 U.S.C. 3006A(a)(2)(B). The decision to appoint couns..
More
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO APPOINT COUNSEL
Re: Dkt. No. 713
SUSAN ILLSTON, District Judge.
Defendant John Dalton filed this pro se motion requesting that the Court appoint counsel to investigate an alleged due process violation. Mot. Dkt. No 713.
A district court may appoint counsel to represent a defendant in certain situations where the person is "financially unable to obtain representation" and the interests of justice so require. 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); see also id. ("Indigent state prisoners applying for habeas corpus relief are not entitled to appointment of counsel unless the circumstances of a particular case indicate that appointed counsel is necessary to prevent due process violations.").
The Court has reviewed Mr. Dalton's request and finds that the appointment of counsel is not warranted in this instance. Nothing in defendant's papers identifies a potential due process violation that could justify the appointment of counsel. Defendant's motion for appointment of counsel is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
