From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Alvarez-Mejia v. Prosper

United States District Court, E.D. California
Feb 15, 2006
No. 1:06-CV-00055-REC-SMS-HC (E.D. Cal. Feb. 15, 2006)

Opinion

No. 1:06-CV-00055-REC-SMS-HC.

February 15, 2006


ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL (DOCUMENT #3)


Petitioner has requested the appointment of counsel. There currently exists no absolute right to appointment of counsel in habeas proceedings. See e.g., Anderson v. Heinze, 258 F.2d 479, 481 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 358 U.S. 889 (1958);Mitchell v. Wyrick, 727 F.2d 773 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 823 (1984). However, Title 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), Rules Governing Section 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 request for appointment of counsel is denied.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Alvarez-Mejia v. Prosper

United States District Court, E.D. California
Feb 15, 2006
No. 1:06-CV-00055-REC-SMS-HC (E.D. Cal. Feb. 15, 2006)
Case details for

Alvarez-Mejia v. Prosper

Case Details

Full title:JESUS ALVAREZ-MEJIA, Petitioner, v. K. PROSPER, et al., Respondent

Court:United States District Court, E.D. California

Date published: Feb 15, 2006

Citations

No. 1:06-CV-00055-REC-SMS-HC (E.D. Cal. Feb. 15, 2006)