Mitchell v. Knipp

Filing 34

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 5/21/2013 DENYING petitioner's 29 request for appointment of counsel ; GRANTING petitioner's 31 request for an extension of time; and petitioner has 30 days to file and serve objections to the 4/8/13 findings and recommendations. (Yin, K)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

RONALD MITCHELL,

11

Petitioner,

Respondent.

12
13

No. 2:12-cv-0780 TLN DAD P

ORDER

vs.
W. KNIPP,

14
15

/

16

Petitioner has requested the appointment of counsel. There currently exists no

17

absolute right to appointment of counsel in habeas proceedings. See Nevius v. Sumner, 105 F.3d

18

453, 460 (9th Cir. 1996). However, 18 U.S.C. § 3006A authorizes the appointment of counsel at

19

any stage of the case “if the interests of justice so require.” See Rule 8(c), Fed. R. Governing

20

§ 2254 Cases. In the present case, the court does not find that the interests of justice would be

21

served by the appointment of counsel at the present time.

22

Also, petitioner has filed a request for an extension of time to file objections to the

23

court’s April 8, 2013 findings and recommendations recommending that petitioner’s application

24

for federal habeas relief be denied. Good cause appearing, that request will be granted.

25

/////

26

/////
1

1

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

2

1. Petitioner’s April 19, 2013, request for appointment of counsel (Docket No.

3

29) is denied without prejudice to a renewal of the motion at a later stage of the proceedings;

4
5

2. Petitioner's April 19, 2013, request for an extension of time (Docket No. 31) is
granted; and

6

3. Petitioner is granted thirty days from the date of this order in which to file and

7

serve objections to the court’s April 8, 2013 findings and recommendations.

8

DATED: May 21, 2013.

9
10
11
12
13

DAD:kly
mitc0780.110+111

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
2