Chapa v. Lizarraga
Filing
16
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 5/2/2017 DENYING 15 Motion to Appoint Counsel without prejudice. (Henshaw, R)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
JOSEPH DAVID CHAPA,
12
Petitioner,
13
14
No. 2:16-cv-2019 JAM AC P
v.
ORDER
JOE A. LIZARRAGA,
15
Respondent.
16
17
Petitioner has requested the appointment of counsel. ECF No. 15. There currently exists
18
no absolute right to appointment of counsel in habeas proceedings. Nevius v. Sumner, 105 F.3d
19
453, 460 (9th Cir. 1996). However, 18 U.S.C. § 3006A authorizes the appointment of counsel at
20
any stage of the case “if the interests of justice so require.” Respondent has filed an answer to the
21
petition and petitioner has filed his traverse. ECF Nos. 11, 15. Nothing further is currently
22
required of petitioner and the court therefore does not find that the interests of justice would be
23
served by the appointment of counsel at the present time.
24
////
25
////
26
////
27
////
28
////
1
1
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that petitioner’s request for appointment of
2
counsel (ECF No. 15) is denied without prejudice to a renewal of the motion at a later stage of the
3
proceedings.
4
DATED: May 2, 2017
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
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?