From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Taylor v. California Dep. of Cor. Rehabilitation

United States District Court, E.D. California
May 15, 2008
No. CIV S-07-2683 LKK KJM P (E.D. Cal. May. 15, 2008)

Opinion

No. CIV S-07-2683 LKK KJM P.

May 15, 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 motion for appointment of counsel (Docket No. 10) is denied without prejudice to a renewal of the motion at a later stage of the proceedings.


Summaries of

Taylor v. California Dep. of Cor. Rehabilitation

United States District Court, E.D. California
May 15, 2008
No. CIV S-07-2683 LKK KJM P (E.D. Cal. May. 15, 2008)
Case details for

Taylor v. California Dep. of Cor. Rehabilitation

Case Details

Full title:ANTHONY J. TAYLOR, Petitioner, v. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND…

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

Date published: May 15, 2008

Citations

No. CIV S-07-2683 LKK KJM P (E.D. Cal. May. 15, 2008)