From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Baker v. Kramer

United States District Court, E.D. California
Oct 13, 2009
No. 2:07-cv-1170 JAM JFM (HC) (E.D. Cal. Oct. 13, 2009)

Opinion

No. 2:07-cv-1170 JAM JFM (HC).

October 13, 2009


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 September 28, 2009 motion for appointment of counsel is denied without prejudice.


Summaries of

Baker v. Kramer

United States District Court, E.D. California
Oct 13, 2009
No. 2:07-cv-1170 JAM JFM (HC) (E.D. Cal. Oct. 13, 2009)
Case details for

Baker v. Kramer

Case Details

Full title:ROBERT GUY BAKER, Petitioner, v. MATHEW C. KRAMER, Warden, Respondent

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

Date published: Oct 13, 2009

Citations

No. 2:07-cv-1170 JAM JFM (HC) (E.D. Cal. Oct. 13, 2009)