From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Downer v. Cramer

United States District Court, E.D. California
Aug 7, 2006
No. CIV S-06-1479-DFL-CMK-P (E.D. Cal. Aug. 7, 2006)

Opinion

No. CIV S-06-1479-DFL-CMK-P.

August 7, 2006


ORDER


Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. 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 motion for appointment of counsel is denied, without prejudice to renewal at a later stage in the proceedings.


Summaries of

Downer v. Cramer

United States District Court, E.D. California
Aug 7, 2006
No. CIV S-06-1479-DFL-CMK-P (E.D. Cal. Aug. 7, 2006)
Case details for

Downer v. Cramer

Case Details

Full title:COLLIE GEORGE DOWNER, Petitioner, v. M. CRAMER, Warden, Respondent

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

Date published: Aug 7, 2006

Citations

No. CIV S-06-1479-DFL-CMK-P (E.D. Cal. Aug. 7, 2006)