From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Kelsaw v. Horel

United States District Court, E.D. California
Apr 13, 2009
No. CIV S-08-1612 MCE EFB P (E.D. Cal. Apr. 13, 2009)

Opinion

No. CIV S-08-1612 MCE EFB P.

April 13, 2009


ORDER


Petitioner is a state prisoner without counsel seeking a writ of habeas corpus. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254. He has requested that the court appoint 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). The court may appointment counsel at any stage of the proceedings "if the interests of justice so require." See 18 U.S.C. § 3006A; see also, Rule 8(c), Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases. The court does not find that the interests of justice would be served by the appointment of counsel at this stage of the proceedings.

Accordingly, it hereby is ORDERED that petitioner's March 20, 2009, motion for appointment of counsel is denied without prejudice.


Summaries of

Kelsaw v. Horel

United States District Court, E.D. California
Apr 13, 2009
No. CIV S-08-1612 MCE EFB P (E.D. Cal. Apr. 13, 2009)
Case details for

Kelsaw v. Horel

Case Details

Full title:RUFUS HARTY KELSAW, Petitioner, v. BOB HOREL, Warden, et al., Respondents

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

Date published: Apr 13, 2009

Citations

No. CIV S-08-1612 MCE EFB P (E.D. Cal. Apr. 13, 2009)