From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Tillman v. Bd. of Parole Hearings

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Sep 8, 2011
No. 2:11-cv-1093 LKK DAD (HC) (E.D. Cal. Sep. 8, 2011)

Opinion

No. 2:11-cv-1093 LKK DAD (HC)

09-08-2011

ANTHONY B. TILLMAN, Petitioner, v. BOARD OF PAROLE HEARINGS, Respondent.


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 August 15, 2011 motion for appointment of counsel (Docket No. 14) is denied.

DALE A. DROZD

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

Tillman v. Bd. of Parole Hearings

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Sep 8, 2011
No. 2:11-cv-1093 LKK DAD (HC) (E.D. Cal. Sep. 8, 2011)
Case details for

Tillman v. Bd. of Parole Hearings

Case Details

Full title:ANTHONY B. TILLMAN, Petitioner, v. BOARD OF PAROLE HEARINGS, Respondent.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Sep 8, 2011

Citations

No. 2:11-cv-1093 LKK DAD (HC) (E.D. Cal. Sep. 8, 2011)