Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05531/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05531-0/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

ANDREW R. LOPEZ, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

 v. )

)

A. K. SCRIBNER, )

)

Respondent. )

____________________________________)

1:04-CV-05531-REC-WMW-HC 

 

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR

EXTENSION OF TIME 

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO APPOINT

COUNSEL

(DOCUMENT #20)

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in a habeas corpus action pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§ 2254. On August 22, 2005, petitioner filed a motion to extend all of his pending court deadlines.

There are no current pending deadlines for petitioner in this action. Furthermore, when petitioner

requests an extension of time, he must specify which deadline he wishes to extend. Therefore,

petitioner's motion shall be denied.

Petitioner has also requested appointment of counsel. 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.), cert. denied, 358 U.S. 889 (1958); Mitchell v. Wyrick, 727 F.2d 773 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 469

U.S. 823 (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.

In the present case, the court does not find that the interests of justice would be served by the

Case 1:04-cv-05531-LJO -WMW Document 21 Filed 10/11/05 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

27

28

appointment of counsel at the present time. Therefore, petitioner's request for appointment of counsel

shall be denied.

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

1. Petitioner's motion for extension of time is DENIED; and

2. Petitioner's motion for appointment of counsel is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 10, 2005 /s/ William M. Wunderlich 

bl0dc4 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:04-cv-05531-LJO -WMW Document 21 Filed 10/11/05 Page 2 of 2