Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00929/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00929-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Campbell
Respondent
Jessie L. Matthews
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

JESSIE L. MATTHEWS,

Petitioner,

vs.

CAMPBELL,

Respondent.

____________________________________/

1:06-cv-0929 AWI TAG HC 

 

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR

APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL (DOC. 9)

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR

EXTENSION OF TIME (DOC. 9)

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. 

Along with the motion for appointment of counsel, Petitioner also made a motion for an

extension of time. Petitioner’s motion fails to address the need for the extension. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioner's request for appointment of

counsel and motion for extension of time are DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 17, 2007 /s/ Theresa A. Goldner 

j6eb3d UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

Case 1:06-cv-00929-TAG Document 10 Filed 12/18/07 Page 1 of 1