Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_19-cv-01521/USCOURTS-caed-2_19-cv-01521-2/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Arnulfo Chavarin
Petitioner
David Holbrook
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

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ARNULFO CHAVARIN,

Petitioner,

v.

DAVID HOLBROOK,

Respondent.

No. 2:19-cv-1521 TLN KJN P

ORDER

Petitioner requested the appointment of counsel. There currently exists no absolute right 

to appointment of counsel in habeas proceedings. See Nevius v. Sumner, 105 F.3d 453, 460 (9th 

Cir. 1996). However, 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), Fed. R. Governing § 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 motion for appointment of 

counsel (ECF No. 23) is denied without prejudice.

Dated: May 5, 2020

chav1521.110

Case 2:19-cv-01521-TLN-KJN Document 24 Filed 05/05/20 Page 1 of 1