Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_10-cv-00980/USCOURTS-caed-1_10-cv-00980-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Derral Adams
Respondent
David Finney
Petitioner

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

DAVID FINNEY,

Petitioner,

vs.

DERRAL ADAMS, Warden,

Respondent.

____________________________________/

1:10-cv-00980-MJS (HC) 

 

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR

APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL

[Doc. 5]

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 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: June 3, 2010 /s/ Michael J. Seng 

92b0h UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:10-cv-00980-AWI-MJS Document 8 Filed 06/04/10 Page 1 of 1