Almeida v. Martinez
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 9/22/2017 DENYING without prejudice petitioner's 20 motion for appointment of counsel. (Yin, K)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
JOSEPH A. ALMEIDA,
No. 2:17-cv-1145 JAM KJN P
JOEL MARTINEZ, et al.,
Petitioner has requested the appointment of counsel. There currently exists no absolute
right to appointment of counsel in habeas proceedings. See Nevius v. Sumner, 105 F.3d 453, 460
(9th Cir. 1996). However, 18 U.S.C. § 3006A authorizes the appointment of counsel at any stage
of the case “if the interests of justice so require.” See Rule 8(c), Fed. R. Governing § 2254 Cases.
In the present case, the court does not find that the interests of justice would be served by the
appointment of counsel at the present time.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that petitioner’s motion for appointment of
counsel (ECF No. 20) is denied without prejudice to a renewal of the motion at a later stage of the
Dated: September 22, 2017
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?