Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_10-cv-01714/USCOURTS-caed-2_10-cv-01714-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Peter Goodridge
Petitioner
Michael Martel
Respondent

Document Text:

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

PETER GOODRIDGE,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-10-1714 WBS GGH P

vs.

MICHAEL MARTEL, Warden, 

Respondent. 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. 

/////

/////

/////

/////

/////

Case 2:10-cv-01714-WBS-GGH Document 16 Filed 08/13/10 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

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that petitioner’s July 27, 2010, request

for appointment of counsel (Docket No. 13) is denied without prejudice to a renewal of the

motion at a later stage of the proceedings.

DATED: August 13, 2010

 /s/ Gregory G. Hollows

GREGORY G. HOLLOWS

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

GGH:kly

good1714.110(2)

Case 2:10-cv-01714-WBS-GGH Document 16 Filed 08/13/10 Page 2 of 2