King v. Lizarraga
ORDER by Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. DENYING 11 MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(ndrS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/20/2017)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
PAUL WAYNE KING,
United States District Court
Northern District of California
Case No. 16-cv-06453-HSG (PR)
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR
APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL
JOE LIZARRAGA, Warden,
Re: Dkt. No. 11
Petitioner has filed a motion for appointment of counsel. The Sixth Amendment’s right to
counsel does not apply in habeas actions. Knaubert v. Goldsmith, 791 F.2d 722, 728 (9th Cir.
1986). Pursuant to statute, however, a district court is authorized to 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.” See 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2)(B). Here,
Petitioner’s claims have been adequately presented in the petition and traverse, and the interests of
justice do not otherwise require the appointment of counsel. Accordingly, Petitioner’s motion for
appointment of counsel is DENIED. Should the circumstances of the case materially change, the
Court may reconsider Petitioner’s request sua sponte.
This order terminates Docket No. 11.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR.
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?