From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Whitfield v. Solis

United States District Court, E.D. California
Feb 15, 2006
No. CV F 04-5758 REC WMW HC, [Doc. 16] (E.D. Cal. Feb. 15, 2006)

Opinion

No. CV F 04-5758 REC WMW HC, [Doc. 16].

February 15, 2006


ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL


Petitioner is a prisoner proceeding with a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 2254.

Petitioner has requested the appointment of counsel. There currently exists no absolute right to appointment of counsel in habeas proceedings. See e.g., Anderson v. Heinze, 258 F.2d 479, 481 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 358 U.S. 889 (1958);Mitchell v. Wyrick, 727 F.2d 773 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 823 (1984). However, Title 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), Rules Governing Section 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 request for appointment of counsel is denied.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Whitfield v. Solis

United States District Court, E.D. California
Feb 15, 2006
No. CV F 04-5758 REC WMW HC, [Doc. 16] (E.D. Cal. Feb. 15, 2006)
Case details for

Whitfield v. Solis

Case Details

Full title:DAVID E. WHITFIELD, Petitioner, v. J. SOLIS, Warden, Respondent

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

Date published: Feb 15, 2006

Citations

No. CV F 04-5758 REC WMW HC, [Doc. 16] (E.D. Cal. Feb. 15, 2006)