Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-02232/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-02232-3/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RUEBEN ROBERTS,

Petitioner, No. CIV S 04-2232 MCE PAN P

vs.

TOM L. CAREY, et al.,

Respondents. ORDER

 /

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. 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. 

Petitioner has also requested an extension of time to file and serve an opposition

to respondents’ January 30, 2006, motion to dismiss. 

Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Petitioner’s March 6, 2006, motion for appointment of counsel is denied

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

Case 2:04-cv-02232-MCE -EFB Document 27 Filed 04/10/06 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. Petitioner’s March 6, 2006, motion for an extension of time is granted; and

3. Petitioner is granted 30 days from the date of this order in which to file and

serve an opposition to respondents’ January 30, 2006, motion to dismiss. Respondents’ reply, if

any, shall be filed 20 days thereafter.

DATED: April 7, 2006.

/mp

/004;robe2232.111+110

Case 2:04-cv-02232-MCE -EFB Document 27 Filed 04/10/06 Page 2 of 2