Barger v. Rackley

Filing 10

ORDER Denying 9 Motion to Appoint Counsel signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 11/24/2014. (Flores, E)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

GARY DALE BARGER,

12

Petitioner,

13
14

1:14 -cv-01629-LJO-JLT-(HC)
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR
APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL

v.

(Doc. 9)

RACKLEY,

15

Respondent.

16
Petitioner has requested the appointment of counsel, citing a muscular condition that

17
18

makes writing difficult as grounds therefore. There currently exists no absolute right to

19

appointment of counsel in habeas proceedings. See, e.g., Anderson v. Heinze, 258 F.2d 479, 481

20

(9th Cir. 1958); Mitchell v. Wyrick, 727 F.2d 773, 774 (8th Cir. 1984). However, Title 18 U.S.C.

21

' 3006A(a)(2)(B) authorizes the appointment of counsel at any stage of the case if "the interests

22

of justice so require." See Rule 8(c), Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases.
Here, the Court issued Findings and Recommendations to dismiss the petition for lack of

23
24

habeas jurisdiction on November 10, 2014. (Doc. 7) The Court does not find that the interests of

25

justice require the appointment of counsel at the present time.

26

///

27

///

28

///

1
2

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioner's request for appointment of
counsel is DENIED.

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

November 24, 2014

/s/ Jennifer L. Thurston
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE