Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_24-cv-03286/USCOURTS-caed-2_24-cv-03286-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Chance Andes
Respondent
Raul R. Lemus
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 

1 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

RAUL R. LEMUS, 

Petitioner, 

v. 

CHANCE ANDES, 

Respondent. 

No. 2:24-cv-3286 SCR P 

ORDER 

 Petitioner has 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. 

The court does not find that the interests of justice would be served by the appointment of counsel 

at the present time. 

 To the extent that petitioner requests an evidentiary hearing, that request is denied without 

prejudice. In accordance with Rule 8(a) of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, the court 

will sua sponte consider whether an evidentiary hearing is warranted once petitioner’s habeas 

corpus application has been fully briefed. 

//// 

//// 

Case 2:24-cv-03286-SCR Document 10 Filed 01/14/25 Page 1 of 2
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 

2 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that petitioner’s motion for appointment of 

counsel and an evidentiary hearing (ECF No. 8) is denied without prejudice to a renewal of the 

motion at a later stage of the proceedings. 

DATED: January 13, 2025 

Case 2:24-cv-03286-SCR Document 10 Filed 01/14/25 Page 2 of 2