Sardella-Lagomarsino v. Swarthout

Filing 25

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 5/3/2011 DENYING ptnr's 22 request for appointment of counsel; ptnr is ADVISED that the court will disregard, and issue no response to, any future filings in this closed case. (Yin, K)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 MARC SARDELLA-LAGOMARSINO, 11 Petitioner, 12 13 14 15 16 No. 2:09-cv-3498 GEB KJN P vs. GARY SWARTHOUT, Warden, Respondent. ORDER / On April 29, 2011, plaintiff filed a motion for appointment of counsel. This 17 action was closed by this court on March 31, 2011, when petitioner’s application for a writ of 18 habeas corpus, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, was denied, and judgment was entered accordingly. 19 Petitioner is now pursuing an appeal before the Ninth Circuit United States Court of Appeals, but 20 has directed the instant motion to this court. 21 There currently exists no absolute right to appointment of counsel in habeas 22 proceedings. See Nevius v. Sumner, 105 F.3d 453, 460 (9th Cir. 1996). While 18 U.S.C. 23 § 3006A authorizes the appointment of counsel at any stage of the case “if the interests of justice 24 so require,” see Rule 8(c), Fed. R. Governing § 2254 Cases, the court does not find that the 25 interests of justice would be served by the appointment of counsel in this case at this time. Not 26 only has this court rendered a final decision adverse to petitioner, but the court declined to issue 1 1 the certificate of appealability referenced in 28 U.S.C. § 2253. 2 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that petitioner’s April 29, 2011 request 3 for appointment of counsel is denied. Petitioner is advised that the court will disregard, and issue 4 no response to, any future filings in this closed case. 5 6 SO ORDERED. DATED: May 3, 2011 7 8 _____________________________________ KENDALL J. NEWMAN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 9 10 sard3498.clsd. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 2

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?