From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Robinson v. Carey

United States District Court, E.D. California
Aug 17, 2006
No. CIV S-03-2180 GEB JFM P (E.D. Cal. Aug. 17, 2006)

Opinion

No. CIV S-03-2180 GEB JFM P.

August 17, 2006


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 September 28, 2005 motion for appointment of counsel is denied without prejudice.


Summaries of

Robinson v. Carey

United States District Court, E.D. California
Aug 17, 2006
No. CIV S-03-2180 GEB JFM P (E.D. Cal. Aug. 17, 2006)
Case details for

Robinson v. Carey

Case Details

Full title:KEVIN DAVID ROBINSON, Petitioner, v. THOMAS L. CAREY, Warden, et al.…

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

Date published: Aug 17, 2006

Citations

No. CIV S-03-2180 GEB JFM P (E.D. Cal. Aug. 17, 2006)