Chavez v. Stainer, et al
ORDER DENYING 2 Motion to Appoint Counsel signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 4/1/2013. (Sant Agata, S)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
1:13-cv-00436 SKO (HC)
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR
APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL
(DOCUMENT #2; DOC. #1, p. 12)
Petitioner has requested the appointment of counsel. 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, 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, considering the claims raised and the stage of the proceedings, 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 is denied.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
April 1, 2013
/s/ Sheila K. Oberto
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?