Gomez v. Sherman

Filing 34

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 1/21/2020 DENYING without prejudice petitioner's 30 requests. (cc: Ninth Circuit, case no. 19-17582) (Yin, K)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10
11

JOSE VICTOR GOMEZ,
Petitioner,

12
v.

13
14

No. 2:17-cv-0305 JAM KJN P

ORDER

S. SHERMAN, Warden,
Respondent.

15
16
17

Petitioner requested the appointment of counsel. There currently exists no absolute right

18

to appointment of counsel in habeas proceedings. See Nevius v. Sumner, 105 F.3d 453, 460 (9th

19

Cir. 1996). However, 18 U.S.C. § 3006A authorizes the appointment of counsel at any stage of

20

the case “if the interests of justice so require.” See Rule 8(c), Fed. R. Governing § 2254 Cases.

21

In the present case, the court does not find that the interests of justice would be served by the

22

appointment of counsel. If petitioner seeks appointment of counsel on appeal, he must file his

23

request for counsel in the Ninth Circuit.

24

In addition, petitioner seeks an extension of time in which to file a certificate of

25

appealability in the Ninth Circuit. Petitioner is advised that he must file a request to extend any

26

deadlines before the Ninth Circuit in his appeal pending before the Ninth Circuit, case No. 19-

27

17582.

28

1

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that petitioner’s requests (ECF No. 30) are

2

denied without prejudice.

3

Dated: January 21, 2020

4
5
6

/gome0305.110

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