Scott v. Cates
ORDER: Denying motion for appointment of counsel 9 . Petitioner's deadline to file his opposition to the motion to dismiss is 1/10/10. (SI, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/28/2009) (Additional attachment(s) added on 1/4/2010: # 1 cs) (ys, COURT STAFF).
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
LEONARD SCOTT, Petitioner, v. MATTHEW CATES, Secretary of Corrections, Respondent. /
No. C 09-2789 SI (pr) ORDER
Petitioner has moved for appointment of counsel to represent him in this action. A district court may appoint counsel to represent a habeas petitioner whenever "the court determines that the interests of justice so require and such person is financially unable to obtain representation." 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2)(B). The decision to appoint counsel is within the discretion of the district court. See Chaney v. Lewis, 801 F.2d 1191, 1196 (9th Cir. 1986), cert. denied, 481 U.S. 1023 (1987). Appointment is mandatory only when the circumstances of a particular case indicate that appointed counsel is necessary to prevent due process violations. See id. Based on the materials in the court file, it does not appear that appointment of counsel is necessary in this action. The motion for appointment of counsel is DENIED. (Docket # 9.) Petitioner is reminded that his deadline to file his opposition to the motion to dismiss is January 10, 2010. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: December 28, 2009 _______________________ SUSAN ILLSTON United States District Judge
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?