From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Wilburn v. Alison

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Sep 11, 2023
2:22-cv-01947-DJC-JDP (HC) (E.D. Cal. Sep. 11, 2023)

Opinion

2:22-cv-01947-DJC-JDP (HC)

09-11-2023

TERRENCE LAMAR WILBURN, Petitioner, v. KATHLEEN ALISON, Respondent.


ORDER

JEREMY D. PETERSON UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

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. The court does not find that the interests of justice would be served by the appointment of counsel since the court has dismissed this matter.

Petitioner moved for the appointment of counsel on September 1, 2023, ECF No. 34, however, that motion was not entered onto the docket until after Judge Calabretta issued an order dismissing this action on September 6, 2023, ECF No. 32.

Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that petitioner's September 1, 2023 request for appointment of counsel, ECF No. 34, is denied without prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Wilburn v. Alison

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Sep 11, 2023
2:22-cv-01947-DJC-JDP (HC) (E.D. Cal. Sep. 11, 2023)
Case details for

Wilburn v. Alison

Case Details

Full title:TERRENCE LAMAR WILBURN, Petitioner, v. KATHLEEN ALISON, Respondent.

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Sep 11, 2023

Citations

2:22-cv-01947-DJC-JDP (HC) (E.D. Cal. Sep. 11, 2023)