Varner v. Sisto et al

Filing 19

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Charlene H. Sorrentino on 8/2/10, ORDERING that 17 petitioner's motion to appoint counsel is DENIED.(Kastilahn, A)

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 / Petitioner has requested the appointment of counsel. There currently exists no absolute right to appointment of counsel in habeas corpus proceedings. See Nevius v. Sumner, 105 F.3d 453, 460 (9th Cir. 1996). However, 18 U.S.C. § 3006A authorizes the appointment of counsel at any stage of the case "if the interests of justice so require." See Rule 8(c), Fed. R. Governing § 2254 Cases. In this case, findings and recommendations have been entered and the case is awaiting review by the assigned District Judge. It does not appear that the interests of justice would be served by the appointment of counsel at this time. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that petitioner's June 15, 2010 request for appointment of counsel is denied. DATED: August 2, 2010 vs. D.K. SISTO, Warden, et al., Respondents. ORDER IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA FREDRICK VARNER, Petitioner, No. CIV S-07-2494 MCE CHS P

CHARLENE H. SORRENTINO UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE