Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-01296/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-01296-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Douglas Vernell Jackson
Petitioner
E. Valenzuela
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

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DOUGLAS VERNELL JACKSON,

Petitioner,

v.

E. VALENZUELA,

Respondent.

_________________________________/

1:13-cv-01296-MJS (HC) 

 

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR

APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL

(Doc. 2)

Petitioner has requested the 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. 1958); Mitchell v. Wyrick, 727 F.2d 773, 774 (8th Cir.

1984). However, Title 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2)(B) 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

require the appointment of counsel at the present time. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY

ORDERED that Petitioner's request for appointment of counsel is denied. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 21, 2013 /s/Michael J. Seng 

12eob4 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:13-cv-01296-LJO-MJS Document 10 Filed 08/21/13 Page 1 of 1