Navarro v. On Habeas Corpus

Filing 23

ORDER DENYING 9 & 21 Motions to Appoint Counsel signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng on 9/6/2017. (Jessen, A)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7
8

MARCO ANTONIO NAVARRO,
Petitioner,

9
10
11

1:17 -cv-00223-MJS (HC)
ORDER DENYING MOTIONS FOR
APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL

v.
ON HABEAS CORPUS,

(ECF NOS. 9, 21)

Respondent.

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

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. 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.

25
26

IT IS SO ORDERED.

27
Dated:
28

September 6, 2017

/s/

Michael J. Seng

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

1
2
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
2