Asberry v. Spearman

Filing 24

ORDER DENYING 3 Motion to Appoint Counsel, signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng on 09/6/17. (Martin-Gill, S)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 8 ALOYSIOUS ASBERRY, Petitioner, 9 10 11 1:17 -cv-00150-DAD-MJS (HC) ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL v. (ECF NO. 3) SPEARMAN, Respondent. 12 13 14 Petitioner has requested the appointment of counsel. There currently exists 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 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. The Court finds that the interests of justice do not require the appointment of counsel in this case at the present time. Accordingly, Petitioner's request for appointment of counsel is HEREBY DENIED. 24 25 IT IS SO ORDERED. 26 Dated: 27 28 September 6, 2017 /s/ 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?