Votino v. Martel
Filing
27
ORDER denying 25 Motion to Appoint Counsel signed by Magistrate Judge John F. Moulds on 09/26/12. (Plummer, M)
1
2
3
4
5
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
6
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
7
LOUIS VOTINO,
8
9
10
Petitioner,
No. 2:10-cv-1784 MCE JFM (HC)
vs.
FRANCISCO JACQUEZ,
11
Respondent.
12
ORDER
/
13
Petitioner has requested the appointment of counsel. There currently exists no
14
absolute right to appointment of counsel in habeas proceedings. See Nevius v. Sumner, 105 F.3d
15
453, 460 (9th Cir. 1996). However, 18 U.S.C. § 3006A authorizes the appointment of counsel at
16
any stage of the case “if the interests of justice so require.” See Rule 8(c), Fed. R. Governing
17
§ 2254 Cases. In the present case, the court does not find that the interests of justice would be
18
served by the appointment of counsel at the present time.
19
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that petitioner’s September 21, 2012
20
motion for appointment of counsel is denied without prejudice to a renewal of the motion at a
21
later stage of the proceedings.
22
DATED: September 26, 2012.
23
24
25
26
/mp; voti1784.110
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?