Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_01-cv-01215/USCOURTS-caed-2_01-cv-01215-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOSE BERBER,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-01-1215 LKK DAD P

vs.

GEORGE ORTIZ, Warden, 

Respondent. ORDER

 /

This petition for writ of habeas corpus was dismissed on March 30, 2005, and is

currently on appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. By order dated May 26, 2005, this

court granted petitioner a thirty day extension of time to file a request to proceed in forma

pauperis on appeal. On June 2, 2005, petitioner filed a request for the appointment of counsel

and a request to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. 

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, petitioner’s request for the appointment of counsel will be denied. Petitioner

Case 2:01-cv-01215-LKK -DAD Document 70 Filed 07/19/05 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

2

is advised that any request for the assistance of counsel on appeal should be addressed to the

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and not to this court.

Petitioner has also filed a request to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. The

court file reflects that petitioner paid the filing fee. Rule 24(a) of the Federal Rules of Appellate

Procedure provides, in part, that where a petitioner has not been granted leave to proceed in

forma pauperis in the district court action, a motion for leave to appeal in forma pauperis must

attach an affidavit that “shows in the detail prescribed by Form 4 of the Appendix of Forms the

party’s inability to pay or to give security for fees and costs.” Petitioner has attached the

appropriate affidavit. Accordingly, his request to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal will be

granted.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Petitioner’s June 2, 2005, request for counsel is denied without prejudice to its

renewal in the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit; and

2. Petitioner’s June 2, 2005, request for leave to proceed in forma pauperis on

appeal is granted.

DATED: July 19, 2005.

/s/Lawrence K. Karlton 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

/berber1215.110

Case 2:01-cv-01215-LKK -DAD Document 70 Filed 07/19/05 Page 2 of 2