Dixon v. Rackley et al
ORDER Denying 16 Motion for Appointment of Counsel, signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng on 10/30/14. (Gonzalez, R)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
JOSEPH KEVIN DIXON,
1:14 -cv-01149-AWI-MJS (HC)
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR
APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL
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, 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 is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
October 30, 2014
Michael J. Seng
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?