From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Johnson v. Dickenson

United States District Court, E.D. California
Nov 1, 2010
No. CIV-S-09-3167 JAM KJM P (E.D. Cal. Nov. 1, 2010)

Opinion

No. CIV-S-09-3167 JAM KJM P.

November 1, 2010


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 October 21, 2010 request for appointment of counsel (Docket No. 20) is denied without prejudice to a renewal of the motion at a later stage of the proceedings.

DATED: November 1, 2010.


Summaries of

Johnson v. Dickenson

United States District Court, E.D. California
Nov 1, 2010
No. CIV-S-09-3167 JAM KJM P (E.D. Cal. Nov. 1, 2010)
Case details for

Johnson v. Dickenson

Case Details

Full title:CLIFFORD JOHNSON, Petitioner, v. KATHLEEN L. DICKENSON, Respondent

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

Date published: Nov 1, 2010

Citations

No. CIV-S-09-3167 JAM KJM P (E.D. Cal. Nov. 1, 2010)