From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Murphy v. Felker

United States District Court, E.D. California
May 13, 2008
No. CIV S-08-0256 FCD GGH P (E.D. Cal. May. 13, 2008)

Opinion

No. CIV S-08-0256 FCD GGH P.

May 13, 2008


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 April 9, 2008 motion for appointment of counsel (Docket #8) is denied without prejudice to a renewal of the motion at a later stage of the proceedings.


Summaries of

Murphy v. Felker

United States District Court, E.D. California
May 13, 2008
No. CIV S-08-0256 FCD GGH P (E.D. Cal. May. 13, 2008)
Case details for

Murphy v. Felker

Case Details

Full title:MARQUIEST LEON MURPHY, Petitioner, v. TOM FELKER, et al., Respondents

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

Date published: May 13, 2008

Citations

No. CIV S-08-0256 FCD GGH P (E.D. Cal. May. 13, 2008)