Brooks v. Arnold

Filing 23

ORDER denying 21 Motion to Appoint Counsel signed by Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes on 1/13/17. (Plummer, M)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 ROY LESTER BROOKS, 11 No. 2:16-cv-1689 JAM DB P Petitioner, 12 v. 13 ERIC ARNOLD, 14 ORDER Respondent. 15 Petitioner has requested the appointment of counsel based on the complexity of the issues 16 17 in this case. There currently exists no absolute right to appointment of counsel in habeas 18 proceedings. See Nevius v. Sumner, 105 F.3d 453, 460 (9th Cir. 1996). However, 18 U.S.C. § 19 3006A authorizes the appointment of counsel at any stage of the case “if the interests of justice so 20 require.” See Rule 8(c), Fed. R. Governing § 2254 Cases. In the present case, the court does not 21 find that the interests of justice would be served by the appointment of counsel at the present 22 time. 23 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that petitioner’s request for appointment of 24 counsel (ECF No. 21) is denied without prejudice to a renewal of the motion at a later stage of the 25 proceedings. 26 Dated: January 13, 2017 27 28 DLB:9 DLB1/prisoner-habeas/broo1689.110 1

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?