Munoz v. Lopez
Filing
6
ORDER Denying Motion For Appointment Of Counsel (Doc. 2 ), signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 7/23/2012. (Fahrney, E)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
9
10
ABRAHAM MUNOZ,
11
12
13
1:12-cv-01180-BAM (HC)
Petitioner,
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR
APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL
vs.
R. LOPEZ,
(DOCUMENT #2)
14
15
16
Respondent.
____________________________________/
Petitioner has requested the appointment of counsel. There currently exists no
17
absolute right to appointment of counsel in habeas proceedings. See, e.g., Anderson v. Heinze,
18
258 F.2d 479, 481 (9th Cir. 1958); Mitchell v. Wyrick, 727 F.2d 773, 774 (8th Cir. 1984).
19
However, Title 18 U.S.C. ยง 3006A(a)(2)(B) authorizes the appointment of counsel at any stage
20
of the case if "the interests of justice so require." See Rule 8(c), Rules Governing Section 2254
21
Cases. In the present case, the Court does not find that the interests of justice require the
22
appointment of counsel at the present time. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that
23
Petitioner's request for appointment of counsel is denied.
24
25
26
27
28
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
23ehd0
July 23, 2012
/s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe
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?