Hodo v. Allison et al
ORDER DENYING 4 Motion to Appoint Counsel signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 9/16/2011. (Marrujo, C)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
JAMES LEE HODO,
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR
APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL
K. ALLISON, et al.,
Petitioner has requested the appointment of counsel, citing his indigence, his lack of
legal experience, and the complexity of the case as grounds therefore. (Doc. 4). There
currently exists no absolute right to appointment of counsel in habeas proceedings. See, e.g.,
Anderson v. Heinze, 258 F.2d 479, 481 (9th Cir. 1958); Mitchell v. Wyrick, 727 F.2d 773, 774
(8th Cir. 1984). However, Title 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2)(B) authorizes the appointment of
counsel at any stage of the case if "the interests of justice so require." See Rule 8(c), Rules
Governing Section 2254 Cases. In the present case, the Court does not find that the interests of
justice require the appointment of counsel at the present time. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY
ORDERED that Petitioner's request for appointment of counsel (Doc. 4), is denied.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: September 16, 2011
/s/ Jennifer L. Thurston
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?