From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Saetern v. Schwartz

United States District Court, E.D. California
Aug 4, 2006
No. CIV S-06-0857 GEB PAN P (E.D. Cal. Aug. 4, 2006)

Opinion

No. CIV S-06-0857 GEB PAN P.

August 4, 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 July 31, 2006 request for appointment of counsel is denied without prejudice to a renewal of the motion at a later stage of the proceedings.


Summaries of

Saetern v. Schwartz

United States District Court, E.D. California
Aug 4, 2006
No. CIV S-06-0857 GEB PAN P (E.D. Cal. Aug. 4, 2006)
Case details for

Saetern v. Schwartz

Case Details

Full title:KAO SAETERN, Petitioner, v. T. SCHWARTZ, et al., Respondents

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

Date published: Aug 4, 2006

Citations

No. CIV S-06-0857 GEB PAN P (E.D. Cal. Aug. 4, 2006)