Cook v. Sisto

Filing 20

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 4/10/09 DENYING 18 Motion to Appoint Counsel without prejudice to a renewal of the motion at a later stage of the proceedings. (Dillon, M)

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 vs. D.K. SISTO, et al., Respondents. / Petitioner has filed a motion for the appointment of counsel. There currently exists no absolute right to appointment of counsel in habeas 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 the present case, the court does not find that the interests of justice would be served by the appointment of counsel at the present time. ///// ///// ///// ///// ///// ORDER IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA JEFFRY IAN COOK, Petitioner, No. CIV S-08-2025 FCD GGH P

1 2 3 4 5

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that petitioner's April 7, 2009, motion for appointment of counsel (Docket No. 18) is denied without prejudice to a renewal of the motion at a later stage of the proceedings. DATED: April 10, 2009 /s/ Gregory G. Hollows

6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
GGH:kly cook2025.110(2)

GREGORY G. HOLLOWS UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE