Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_10-cv-01304/USCOURTS-caed-1_10-cv-01304-2/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Daniel Andrew Davis
Petitioner
M. 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

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DANIEL ANDREW DAVIS,

Petitioner,

vs.

M. MARTEL,

Respondent.

____________________________________/

1:10-cv-1304 DLB (HC) 

 

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR

APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL

(DOCUMENT #3)

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: July 28, 2010 /s/ Dennis L. Beck 

ah0l UNIT 4d ED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:10-cv-01304-AWI-DLB Document 8 Filed 07/29/10 Page 1 of 1