Johnson v. Kernan et al

Filing 18

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 4/11/2018 DENYING without prejudice petitioner's 17 request for appointment of counsel.(Yin, K)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JERRY C. JOHNSON, 12 13 14 15 No. 2:17-cv-2525 AC P Petitioner, v. ORDER SCOTT KERNAN, et al., Respondents. 16 17 Petitioner has requested the appointment of counsel. There currently exists no absolute 18 right to appointment of counsel in habeas proceedings. Nevius v. Sumner, 105 F.3d 453, 460 (9th 19 Cir. 1996). However, 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2) authorizes the appointment of counsel at any 20 stage of the case if “the interests of justice so require.” Petitioner asserts that he requires counsel 21 because of his mobility limitations and limited ability to acquire the knowledge necessary to 22 pursue this case. He also states he will need an attorney if there is an evidentiary hearing. As 23 petitioner was previously advised, respondent has been ordered to respond to the petition and he 24 is not required to take any further action until a response has been filed. It is not clear how 25 petitioner’s mobility limitations prevent him from representing himself and his limited knowledge 26 is not an extraordinary circumstance. Furthermore, it is not yet known whether an evidentiary 27 hearing will be held in this case. For these reasons, the court does not find that the interests of 28 justice would be served by the appointment of counsel at the present time. 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that petitioner’s request for appointment of 2 counsel (ECF No. 17) is denied without prejudice to a renewal of the motion at a later stage of the 3 proceedings. 4 DATED: April 11, 2018 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?