Boyd v. Kramer

Filing 13

ORDER 12 Denying Petitioner's Request for Appointment of Counsel. Signed by Judge Ronald M. Whyte on 5/6/09. (jg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/7/2009)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 *E-FILED - 5/7/09* IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA MOBASSA BOYD, Petitioner, vs. MATTHEW KRAMER, Warden, Respondent. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. C 08-3005 RMW (PR) ORDER DENYING PETITIONER'S REQUEST FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL (Docket No. 12) Petitioner, a state parolee proceeding pro se, filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The petition was denied, judgment was entered against petitioner, and the case was closed on December 9, 2008. The judgment was not appealed. On April 19, 2009, petitioner has sent a letter to the court requesting appointment of counsel. Although the Sixth Amendment's right to counsel does not apply in habeas matters, see Knaubert v. Goldsmith, 791 F.2d 722, 728 (9th Cir. 1986), 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). As this case has been closed for more than four months and there is nothing pending, there is no need for appointment of counsel. Accordingly, petitioner's request for appointment of counsel is DENIED. This order terminates docket no. 12. Order Denying Petitioner's Request for Appointment of Counsel 1 P:\PRO-SE\SJ.Rmw\HC.08\Boyd005den.atty.wpd 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 IT IS SO ORDERED. 5/6/09 DATED: _______________ RONALD M. WHYTE United States District Judge Order Denying Petitioner's Request for Appointment of Counsel 2 P:\PRO-SE\SJ.Rmw\HC.08\Boyd005den.atty.wpd

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?