Blocker v. Soto

Filing 46

ORDER signed by District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 9/27/2017 ORDERING 45 Petitioner's request, construed as a request for appointment of counsel, is DENIED without prejudice; and Petitioner is GRANTED 60 days from the date of this order in which to file objections to 37 Findings and Recommendations. No further extensions of time will be granted. (Reader, L)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

JOSHUA BLOCKER,

12
13
14
15

No. 2:15-cv-1416 KJM KJN P

Petitioner,
v.

ORDER

J. SOTO, Warden,
Respondent.

16
17

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel. On March 9, 2017, the

18

assigned magistrate judge recommended that respondent’s motion to dismiss be granted, and this

19

court so ordered on March 31, 2017. Afterwards, petitioner requested more time to object to the

20

findings and recommendations, which this court granted. ECF Nos. 40, 41. The court therefore

21

vacated the March 31 order and judgment, and granted petitioner two extensions of time to file

22

objections to the findings and recommendations. ECF Nos. 41 & 44.

23

On June 23, 2017, petitioner filed a request for assistance from the court to present

24

a “better defense.” ECF No. 45 at 2. Construing the filing as a request for the appointment of

25

counsel, the court denies this request. There currently exists no absolute right to appointment of

26

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

27

although 18 U.S.C. § 3006A authorizes the appointment of counsel at any stage of the case “if the

28

interests of justice so require,” see Rule 8(c), Fed. R. Governing § 2254, appointing counsel here,
1

1

at this stage of the proceedings, would not serve the interests of justice. Instead, petitioner is

2

granted more time to prepare and file his objections to the findings and recommendations. No

3

further extensions will be granted.

4

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

5

1. Petitioner’s June 23, 2017 request (ECF No. 45), construed as a request for

6
7

appointment of counsel, is denied without prejudice; and
2. Petitioner is granted sixty days from the date of this order in which to file

8

objections to the March 9, 2017 findings and recommendations. No further extensions of time

9

will be granted.

10
11

This resolves ECF No. 45.
DATED: September 27, 2017.

12
13

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2