Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_13-cv-01276/USCOURTS-caed-2_13-cv-01276-4/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 

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

JOHN MONTALVO, 

Petitioner, 

v. 

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF 

CORRECTIONS, et al., 

Respondents. 

No. 2:13-cv-01276-MCE-GGH 

ORDER 

This matter is before the undersigned pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(17) on remand from 

the Ninth Circuit. Currently pending before the court are respondents’ motion to dismiss, 

plaintiff’s motion for an extension of time to file and opposition, and plaintiff’s motion to appoint 

counsel. 

The court will deny plaintiff’s motion to appoint 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. The does find, however, that petitioner 

has shown good cause for the granting of an extension of time. 

Case 2:13-cv-01276-MCE-GGH Document 42 Filed 01/12/16 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 

27 

28 

2

In accordance with the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 

1. Petitioner’s January 6, 2016, motion for appointment of counsel (ECF No. 40) is 

DENIED without prejudice to a renewal of the motion at a later stage of the proceedings; 

2. Petitioner’s January 6, 2016, motion for an extension of time (ECF No. 41) is 

GRANTED; and 

3. Petitioner shall file an opposition to respondents’ motion to dismiss within thirty days 

from the date of this order. 

Dated: January 12, 2016 

 /s/ Gregory G. Hollows 

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

/mont1276.eot 

Case 2:13-cv-01276-MCE-GGH Document 42 Filed 01/12/16 Page 2 of 2