From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lopez v. Swarthout

United States District Court, E.D. California
Jul 6, 2010
No. CIV S-10-0873 DAD P (E.D. Cal. Jul. 6, 2010)

Opinion

No. CIV S-10-0873 DAD P.

July 6, 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 June 29, 2010, request for appointment of counsel (Doc. No. 12) is denied without prejudice to a renewal of the motion at a later stage of the proceedings.


Summaries of

Lopez v. Swarthout

United States District Court, E.D. California
Jul 6, 2010
No. CIV S-10-0873 DAD P (E.D. Cal. Jul. 6, 2010)
Case details for

Lopez v. Swarthout

Case Details

Full title:FELIPE LOPEZ, Petitioner, v. GARY SWARTHOUT, et al., Respondents

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

Date published: Jul 6, 2010

Citations

No. CIV S-10-0873 DAD P (E.D. Cal. Jul. 6, 2010)