Opinion
No. CIV S-02-1539 GEB JFM P.
August 25, 2006
ORDER
Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with this application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On May 17, 2006, this court issued findings and recommendations which recommended that petitioner's application be denied. Subsequently, petitioner filed two requests for extension of time to file objections to the findings and recommendations and one request for the appointment of counsel. All of those requests were denied. On August 7, 2006, petitioner filed another request for the appointment of counsel. Attached to petitioner's request is a February 2, 2006, letter on the letterhead of the Division of Adult Institutions at California State Prison, Corcoran, from G. Goddard, Ph.D., who is designated as "principal." The letter is addressed to "Federal, State and Local Courts" and it states that because of extensive remodeling and modifications to the law library at Corcoran, there has been "no access" to the libraries by inmates who have been identified as priority legal users, and that the "paging" system provided to the inmates "does not fully meet the entire case research needs of impacted inmates." Petitioner does not explain whether the library at Corcoran is still undergoing remodeling or how the situation at the law library has impacted his ability to file objections to the findings and recommendations.
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. The court will, however, grant petitioner another extension of time to file objections to the findings and recommendations. If petitioner is unable to meet the deadline set by this order, he must explain in detail why he needs further time to file objections, including whether the law library at Corcoran prison is still closed. Unexplained letters and vague assertions will not be sufficient to warrant any further extensions of time.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Petitioner's August 7, 2006, request for appointment of counsel is denied; and
2. Petitioner shall file and serve objections to the May 17, 2006, findings and recommendations on or before October 15, 2006.