From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Knox v. Martel

United States District Court, E.D. California
May 7, 2008
No. CIV S-08-0494-MCE-CMK-P (E.D. Cal. May. 7, 2008)

Opinion

No. CIV S-08-0494-MCE-CMK-P.

May 7, 2008


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 seeks the appointment of counsel (Doc. 9). 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 (Doc. 9) is denied without prejudice to renewal, at the earliest, after an answer to the petitioner has been filed.


Summaries of

Knox v. Martel

United States District Court, E.D. California
May 7, 2008
No. CIV S-08-0494-MCE-CMK-P (E.D. Cal. May. 7, 2008)
Case details for

Knox v. Martel

Case Details

Full title:ANTHONY MARCELOUS KNOX, SR, Petitioner, v. M. MARTEL, et al., Respondents

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

Date published: May 7, 2008

Citations

No. CIV S-08-0494-MCE-CMK-P (E.D. Cal. May. 7, 2008)