From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Moore v. Horel

United States District Court, E.D. California
Sep 15, 2009
No. CIV S-02-0007 JAM DAD P (E.D. Cal. Sep. 15, 2009)

Opinion

No. CIV S-02-0007 JAM DAD P.

September 15, 2009


ORDER


Petitioner has again requested the appointment of counsel. As petitioner has been previously advised, 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). In addition, 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 September 11, 2009, request for appointment of counsel (Doc. No. 130) is denied without prejudice.


Summaries of

Moore v. Horel

United States District Court, E.D. California
Sep 15, 2009
No. CIV S-02-0007 JAM DAD P (E.D. Cal. Sep. 15, 2009)
Case details for

Moore v. Horel

Case Details

Full title:THOMAS EUGENE MOORE, Petitioner, v. ROBERT HOREL, Warden, Respondent

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

Date published: Sep 15, 2009

Citations

No. CIV S-02-0007 JAM DAD P (E.D. Cal. Sep. 15, 2009)