Opinion
No. CIV S-10-1899 GEB DAD P.
April 26, 2011
ORDER
Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with an application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On April 4, 2011, this court issued findings and recommendations finding that this action is barred by the applicable statute of limitations and recommending that respondent's September 21, 2010 motion to dismiss on that ground, unopposed by petitioner, be granted. Petitioner has now filed a motion for an extension of time, which this court construes as a request for an additional period of sixty days to file objections to the April 4, 2011 findings and recommendations. Good cause appearing, petitioner's motion for extension of time will be granted. Petitioner may, as appropriate, include with those objections a proposed opposition to respondent's motion to dismiss.
Petitioner has also moved for 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.
In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Petitioner's April 13, 2011 motion for extension of time (Docket No. 20) is granted;
2. Petitioner is granted sixty days from the date of this order in which to file and serve objections to this court's April 4, 2011 findings and recommendations and, as appropriate, a proposed opposition to respondent's September 21, 2010 motion to dismiss; and
3. Petitioner's April 13, 2011 motion for appointment of counsel (Docket No. 21) is denied.
DATED: April 25, 2011.