Wilson v. California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation

Filing 5

ORDER Denying 3 Motion for Appointment of Counsel signed by Judge Gary S. Austin on 11/30/2007. (Flores, E)

(HC) Wilson v. California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation

Doc. 5

Case 1:07-cv-01703-OWW-GSA 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Respondent. 16 vs. THOMAS L. WILSON, Petitioner,

Document 5

Filed 12/03/2007

Page 1 of 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

1:07-cv-1703 OWW-GSA (HC) ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL (DOCUMENT #3)

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION,

____________________________________/ 17 Petitioner has requested the appointment of counsel. There currently exists no absolute 18 right to appointment of counsel in habeas proceedings. See e.g., Anderson v. Heinze, 258 F.2d 19 479, 481 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 358 U.S. 889 (1958); Mitchell v. Wyrick, 727 F.2d 773 (8th Cir.), 20 cert. denied, 469 U.S. 823 (1984). However, Title 18 U.S.C. § 3006A authorizes the appointment 21 of counsel at any stage of the case "if the interests of justice so require." See Rule 8(c), Rules 22 Governing Section 2254 Cases. In the present case, the court does not find that the interests of 23 justice would be served by the appointment of counsel at the present time. Accordingly, IT IS 24 HEREBY ORDERED that petitioner's request for appointment of counsel is denied. 25 IT IS SO ORDERED. 26 27 28 Dated: 23ehd0

November 30, 2007

/s/ Gary S. Austin UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Dockets.Justia.com