From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Harris v. Martinez

United States District Court, W.D. Washington, at Seattle
Feb 20, 2007
CASE NO. C06-954JLR (W.D. Wash. Feb. 20, 2007)

Opinion

CASE NO. C06-954JLR.

February 20, 2007


ORDER


The court is in receipt of Mr. Harris's motion for extension of time, which he submitted by letter dated February 6, 2007 (Dkt. # 22). In its order of February 8, 2007, the court granted a continuance in this matter, allowing Mr. Harris to file his objections to Judge Theiler's Report and Recommendation by March 1, 2007 (Dkt. # 21). The court therefore STRIKES as moot Mr. Harris's motion (Dkt. # 22).

Although Mr. Harris has not filed a motion requesting the appointment of counsel, he states that he is currently seeking the representation of a Federal Public Defender. Mr. Harris is not entitled to the appointment of a Federal Public Defender unless the court determines that the interests of justice so require. See 18 U.S.C. § 3006A. "Absent unusual circumstances, the law does not require that an indigent prisoner be furnished with counsel for the purpose of attacking a state court judgment in the federal courts." Schlette v. People of State of Cal., 284 F.2d 827, 836 (1960). The court advises Mr. Harris that he shall be prepared to file his objections to the Report and Recommendation by March 1, 2007, without the assistance of court-appointed counsel.


Summaries of

Harris v. Martinez

United States District Court, W.D. Washington, at Seattle
Feb 20, 2007
CASE NO. C06-954JLR (W.D. Wash. Feb. 20, 2007)
Case details for

Harris v. Martinez

Case Details

Full title:MZEE BARAKA HARRIS, Plaintiff, v. BENEDICT MARTINEZ, Defendant

Court:United States District Court, W.D. Washington, at Seattle

Date published: Feb 20, 2007

Citations

CASE NO. C06-954JLR (W.D. Wash. Feb. 20, 2007)