Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-00542/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-00542-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Sammy L. Morris
Petitioner
William J. Sullivan
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

SAMMY L. MORRIS, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

v. )

)

WILLIAM J. SULLIVAN, et al., )

)

)

Respondent. )

____________________________________)

1:07-cv-0542 LJO WMW HC 

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR

APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL

Within petitioner's Writ for Mandate, 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.), 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 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: May 8, 2007 /s/ William M. Wunderlich 

bl0dc4 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:07-cv-00542-LJO-WMW Document 5 Filed 05/09/07 Page 1 of 1