Opinion
No. C 06-4938 SBA (PR).
June 12, 2007
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL
Petitioner has requested the appointment of counsel.
The Sixth Amendment's right to counsel does not apply in habeas corpus actions. See Knaubert v. Goldsmith, 791 F.2d 722, 728 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 867 (1986). 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. 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); Knaubert, 791 F.2d at 728;Bashor v. Risley, 730 F.2d 1228, 1234 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 838 (1984). Appointment is mandatory only when the circumstances of a particular case indicate that appointed counsel is necessary to prevent due process violations, see Chaney, 801 F.2d at 1196; Eskridge v. Rhay, 345 F.2d 778, 782 (9th Cir. 1965), cert. denied, 382 U.S. 996 (1966), and whenever an evidentiary hearing is required, see Rule 8(c) of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases; United States v. Duarte-Higareda, 68 F.3d 369, 370 (9th Cir. 1995); Bashor, 730 F.2d at 1234.
The Court finds that the appointment of counsel is not necessary at this time. Petitioner's claims are typical claims that arise in criminal appeals and are not especially complex. This is not an exceptional case that would warrant representation on federal habeas review.
There also is no indication that an evidentiary hearing is required under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(e). Petitioner's claims do not rely upon extra-record evidence and a factual basis exists in the record to determine the claims. If during its review of the merits of the petition the Court determines that further fact finding is required, the Court will decide whether to hold an evidentiary hearing or whether the facts can be gathered by way of mechanisms short of an evidentiary hearing, such as supplementation of the record with sworn declarations from the pertinent witnesses. See Downs v. Hoyt, 232 F.3d 1031, 1041 (9th Cir. 2000).
For these reasons, Petitioner's request for the appointment of counsel is DENIED.
This Order terminates Docket no. 11.
IT IS SO ORDERED.