From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Calihan v. Knipp

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Mar 1, 2013
No. 2:12-cv-1822 LKK CKD P (E.D. Cal. Mar. 1, 2013)

Opinion

No. 2:12-cv-1822 LKK CKD P

03-01-2013

KENNETH R. CALIHAN, Petitioner, v. WILLIAM KNIPP, Respondent.


ORDER

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 February 21, 2013 request for appointment of counsel (Docket No. 14) is denied without prejudice to a renewal of the motion at a later stage of the proceedings.

______________________________

CAROLYN K. DELANEY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

Calihan v. Knipp

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Mar 1, 2013
No. 2:12-cv-1822 LKK CKD P (E.D. Cal. Mar. 1, 2013)
Case details for

Calihan v. Knipp

Case Details

Full title:KENNETH R. CALIHAN, Petitioner, v. WILLIAM KNIPP, Respondent.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Mar 1, 2013

Citations

No. 2:12-cv-1822 LKK CKD P (E.D. Cal. Mar. 1, 2013)