Jackson v. California Board of Parole Hearings

Filing 16

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 5/21/2015 DENYING without prejudice petitioner's 12 motion for appointment of counsel. (Yin, K)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

JOHNNY CLIFFORD JACKSON,

12
13
14
15

No. 2:15-cv-0609 KJM KJN P

Petitioner,
v.

ORDER

CALIFORNIA BOARD OF PAROLE
HEARINGS,
Respondent.

16
17
18

Petitioner has requested the appointment of counsel. Petitioner contends that when a court

19

issues an order to show cause, counsel must be appointed for an indigent petitioner who requests

20

counsel, citing Rule 4.551(c)(2) of the California Rules of Court. However, petitioner’s reliance

21

on Rule 4.551(c)(2) is unavailing because it applies to habeas corpus proceedings in the

22

California state courts. The instant action is proceeding in federal court.

23

In federal court, there currently exists no absolute right to appointment of counsel in

24

habeas proceedings. See Nevius v. Sumner, 105 F.3d 453, 460 (9th Cir. 1996). However, 18

25

U.S.C. § 3006A authorizes the appointment of counsel at any stage of the case “if the interests of

26

justice so require.” See Rule 8(c), Fed. R. Governing § 2254 Cases. In the present case, the court

27

does not find that the interests of justice would be served by the appointment of counsel at the

28

present time.

1

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that petitioner’s motion for appointment of

2

counsel (ECF No. 12) is denied without prejudice.

3

Dated: May 21, 2015

4
5
6
/ jack0609.110

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2