Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-00695/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-00695-0/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

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ANTHONY MARCEL BEARD, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

v. )

)

SUPERIOR COURT OF FRESNO )

COUNTY )

)

Respondent. )

____________________________________)

1:07-cv-00695-LJO-TAG-HC 

ORDER DENYING REQUEST 

FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL

(Doc. 3)

Petitioner has requested for the appointment of counsel. Petitioner contends that he

cannot afford to retain counsel and that his petition contains “novel and complex issues of federal

law) requiring the appointment of counsel. (Doc. 3, p. 1). 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.1958); Mitchell v. Wyrick, 727 F.2d 773 (8th Cir. 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. At the present time, the Court

does not find that the interests of justice require the appointment of counsel. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioner’s request for appointment of

counsel (Doc. 3), is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 14, 2007 /s/ Theresa A. Goldner 

j6eb3d UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

Case 1:07-cv-00695-LJO-TAG Document 7 Filed 05/14/07 Page 1 of 1